Delhi Court July 2011 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Devender Kumar and ors. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2011
1. These four appeals impugn a common judgment and order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi dated 19.10.2001 in SC No.16/2000. 2. The prosecution case briefly was that Parvesh, the Appellant Shyamlal's daughter had an affair with Mahesh (hereafter referred to as "the deceased") and had eloped with him in December 1999. Shyam Lal had lodged a missing person report with the Police. The prosecution contended that on 23.03.2000 Mahesh and Parvesh went to Surender's, (an Electrician's) shop at Najafgarh; he was Mahesh's friend. Shyam Lal, Himmat, Pritam and Devender, the Appellants in this case (referred to hereafter by their names), alongwith some others, reached there in a Tata Sumo Car -DL4CF 9386. It was stated that Surender had previously received a telephone call from Mahesh informing him that Parvesh's parents had agreed to his marriage with her and that they would be visiting him (Surender) on 22.03.2000. On that day i.e. 23.03.2000 Parvesh and Mahesh reached Surender's sho...
Laxman Chandra Sarkar Vs. Uoi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2011
1. Enrolled on 20.12.1973 as a Constable (Radio Mechanic) in BSF, petitioner was attached with the 173rd Bn. 2. On 14.6.1997 he was transferred to the 127th Bn. which was then deployed at Kolkata. 3. Vide signal dated 13.6.1998 petitioner was transferred to the 49th Bn. which posting he challenged by and under W.P.(C) No.12979/1998 before the Calcutta High Court and an ex-parte stay against transfer was passed by the Court in his favour. Accordingly, the department cancelled the order transferring petitioner from the 127th Bn. to the 49th Bn. 4. In October 1999 the 127th Bn. as a whole was moved to Srinagar. 5. Taking an obstinate stand that his transfer was stayed; ignoring that the transfer stayed was the petitioner's posting from the 127th Bn. to the 49th Bn., which movement had been withdrawn by the department and since the 127th Bn. as a whole was transferred to Srinagar and thus he could take no benefit of the ex- parte Court order obtained by him, petitioner refused to join at S...
T.K. Malhotra and anr. Vs. Bharat Bhushan Arora
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2011
1. By this common judgment, it is proposed to decide two appeals being RFA No. 293/2002 and RFA No. 436/2002, the former instituted by the defendant in Suit No. 552/93 (Old Suit No. 1273 of 1986) titled Sh. Bharat Bhushan Arora v. T.K. Malhotra, and the latter by the plaintiff in the said suit. 2. In the first appeal, the appellant seeks to assail the judgment and decree dated 24.01.2002 passed by the learned Additional District Judge in the aforesaid Suit being in the sum of ` 1,38,308.53 (Rupees one lakh thirty eight thousand three hundred eight and paise fifty three only) with pendente lite and future interest thereon at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the institution of the suit till the date of realization. It is proposed to deal first with this appeal. 3. The case of the plaintiff, who is the respondent in the present appeal, as delineated in the plaint is that the plaintiff had supplied fabric to the defendant - appellant against various orders placed on various dates ...
Sharad Chandra Sharma Vs. Delhi Transco Limited and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2011
1. The challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated 20th April 1998 suspending the Petitioner from service and the subsequent order dated 24th April 1998 passed by the Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking („DESU), which was subsequently reconstituted as the Delhi Vidyut Board („DVB), dismissing the Petitioner from service. It may be mentioned that the Respondent has since been substituted by the Delhi Transco Limited („DTL) by an order dated 11th November 2008 of this Court. 2. The Petitioner was initially appointed on 7th October 1968 as a Junior Clerk in the DESU. He was subsequently confirmed in the said post by an order dated 21st June 1972. By an order dated 14th May 1985 he was promoted to the post of Senior Clerk and was assigned the job of a Vigilance Inspector on 10th July 1985. The Petitioner worked in the Vigilance Department up to 22nd October 1990. The Petitioner states that his work as Vigilance Inspector was appreciated and he received a cash award...
Nalini Prabhakar Vs. University of Delhi and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2011
1. This writ petition is by a lecturer in the School of Correspondence Courses and Continuing Education (Respondent No. 2), seeking the quashing of a decision dated 30th September, 2003 whereby the Executive Council („EC) of the University of Delhi, Respondent No. 1, did not accept the recommendations of the Managing Committee („MC) of Respondent No. 2 recommending the regularisation of the services of the Petitioner. The further prayer in the writ petition is that a mandamus should be issued to Respondent No. 1 University to reconsider the case of the Petitioner for regularisation as lecturer in English in Respondent No. 2. 2. Pursuant to an advertisement dated 8 August, 1995 the Petitioner applied for appointment to the post of lecturer in English in Respondent No. 2. A regularly constituted Selection Committee which met on 9th February 1996 selected the Petitioner and recommended her name for the panels for permanent as well as temporary posts. The EC of Respondent No. 1...
C.S. Agarwal and anr. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2011
1. C.S. Agarwal, the appellant in LPA No.819 of 2010, had filed Writ Petition (Crl.) No.57 of 2010 invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking appropriate writ for quashing the FIR No.264/2009 dated 23.12.2009 lodged against him and others by the Economic Offences Wing, Crime and Railways, Delhi under Sections 420/406/120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The said writ petition has been dismissed vide orders dated 11.11.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court and against that order LPA No.819 of 2010 has been preferred by C.S. Agarwal. 2. Another accused in the said FIR is D.K. Jain. He has also filed LPA No.825 of 2010 challenging the same judgment, inter alia, on the ground that some of the observations in the said orders are prejudicial to him and therefore, he is also an aggrieved party. The respondents took a primary objection to the maintainability of these LPAs cont...
Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba Trading as Toshiba Corp. Vs. Mr. S.K.Sil and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2011
1. This is a suit for permanent injunction, damages, rendition of accounts and delivery up of the infringing material etc. 2. The plaintiff is a company incorporated in Japan which was founded in the year 1875. Initially, the plaintiff company was set up under the name Tanaka Seizo-sho and the name was changed to Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba in the year 1984 trading as Toshiba Corporation. The plaintiff company is a diversified manufacturer and marketer of advanced electronic and electrical products, spanning information and communications equipments and systems, internet-based solutions and services, electronic components and materials, power systems, industrial and social infrastructure systems and household appliances. The Toshiba Corporation operates globally in a number of countries including India and it had net sales of Rs.3834.05 billion in the year 2008 with sales of Rs.664 billion in the Asian region outside Japan alone. 3. The plaintiff company has been selling its products thro...
Super Cassetes Industries Ltd. Vs. Myspace Inc. and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2011
1. By this order, I shall dispose of the following applications: a) IA No.15781/2008 under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the CPC). b) IA No.3085/2009 under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC. 2. The Plaintiff has filed the instant suit for restraining infringement of copyright, damages etc. The plaintiff claims to be the owner of the copyright in the repertoire of songs, cinematograph films, sound recordings etc. The plaintiff claims to have over 20000 Hindi Non film songs and around 50000 songs in regional languages. 3. The plaintiff further states that the business of the plaintiff which is film producing, music distribution etc is largely dependant upon the exploitation of its copyright. The said copyright exploitation enables the plaintiff to sustain its creative activities thereby giving opportunities to many talents including composers, artists, singers, etc. The plaintiff states that the monetary gains arising from copyright exploitation ...
Union of India Vs. Deepak Panwar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-28-2011
1. In this writ petition filed on or about 5th May, 2011, Union of India, Ministry of Urban Development, has assailed the order dated 21st April, 2010 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi (for short, the tribunal) allowing O.A. No. 3167/2009 filed by the respondent-Deepak Panwar. The writ petition is filed belatedly and there is delay of more than one year in filing of the writ petition. The only ground mentioned is that the matter was sent to the Ministry of Law for obtaining consent and the delay is not intentional. This explanation without details does not merit acceptance. 2. The aforesaid aspect is important as the tribunal had allowed the original application filed by the respondent and quashed the Memorandum of Charge dated 16th September, 2009 on the ground of delay. The said memorandum pertains to the period 1997-98, when the respondent was working as an Executive Engineer (Civil), Bikaner, Rajasthan and was the Engineer-in-Charge for construc...
Mahesh Sharma Vs. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-28-2011
1. The Petitioner, who was working with Respondent No. 1 Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited („BHEL) as an Assistant Cashier („AC), has filed this writ petition for a declaration that the entire enquiry proceedings instituted against him beginning with an order dated 28th July 1993 and concluding with the punishment imposed on the Petitioner of reduction of pay by four stages for a period of four years by the order dated 22nd April 1997 of the Disciplinary Authority („DA) are illegal and unconstitutional. The Petitioner prays for a further direction to the Respondents to restore the pay and allowances of the Petitioner with consequential benefits. 2. The Petitioner was working with Respondent BHEL as an AC. A report of internal audit of the BHEL submitted in June 1993 pointed out several irregularities in the reimbursements claimed by one Mr. Deepak Dhawan who was the Private Secretary to the Director (Personnel). The claims were admitted for payment by one Mr. S.S. Shar...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »