Delhi Court August 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.
Pankaj Kumar Vs. Sunil Kumar Vaid and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-26-2011
1. These revision petitions arise out of a common impugned judgment passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge in two criminal appeals arising out of complaint cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,1881 (in short N.I. Act) relating to the dishonor of cheques issued in favour of the complainants Gopal Dass Vaid (since deceased) and his son Sunil Kumar Vaid in course of the same transaction. 2. At the outset it may be noted that the learned counsel for the Petitioner after some arguments confined her arguments only to the extent that despite the cheques were issued in the course of the same transaction and were dishonoured, the Learned Trial Court and Learned Appellant Court failed to direct that the sentences should run concurrently. The Petitioner has undergone almost the entire sentence in one case and it is thus prayed that the benefit of Section 427 IPC be granted to the Petitioner and the sentences be directed to run concurrently. Reliance in this regard is...
Birender Mahto Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-26-2011
1. The writ petition was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 27.2.2009 by a Bench Coram: B.N.Chaturvedi, J. and S.L.Bhayana, J. Review sought vide R.P.No.439/2009 has been left as an unfinished task and since both Honble Judges have superannuated and the review petition remained pending, the present decision decides the said review petition as also CM No.14148/2009. 2. Seeking review it is pleaded in Ground (a) that a factually wrong information has been observed by the Bench in para 10 of the judgment under review wherein it stands recorded that a criminal case was pending in which the petitioner was an accused. 3. Vide CM No.14148/2009 it is stated that said fact recorded is not at page 10 of the judgment but is in para 11 of the decision and thus it is prayed that the averments in the review petition be read as explained in the application. 4. Indeed, the assertions in the application are correct and thus we dispose of the application noting that the stated wrong fact noted by t...
Dr.Punita K.Sodhi Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-26-2011
1. The petitioner, Dr.Punita K.Sodhi, who appears in person states that by order dated 5th July, 2011 she has been promoted to the post of Associate Professor w.e.f. 1st March, 2009, and consequently, reliefs sought by her except relief sought against extension of probation have been received by her. 2. The petitioner on consideration of her pleas and contentions also states that she does not want to press her relief against the extension of her probation by 78 days at the post of teaching specialist at this stage with liberty to raise it at appropriate stage in accordance with law, if so required. Consequently, writ petition is disposed of with liberty as prayed for. Parties are, however, left to bear their own costs. All the pending applications are also disposed of....
Smt.Kusuma Kumari Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-26-2011
1. Appointed as a constable with Central Industrial Security Force in the year 2000, the petitioner was attached with a Battalion and assigned duties at the Bangalore International Airport in the year 2008. On 22.10.2008, she was granted casual leave for a period of 14 days and was required to report for duty on 17.11.2008 after availing leave on non-working days prefixing and suffixing the leave period. On 17.11.2008 the petitioner admittedly arrived at the airport and marked her attendance in the General Diary kept at the control room, but did not report for duty. 2. What happened on 17.11.2008 is an admitted fact with a minor variation in the rival versions. Admittedly, petitioner submitted a letter of resignation on said date, which was not accepted. Admittedly, having left the letter of resignation with the Commandant of the Battalion, petitioner left the airport and never returned. Admittedly, before she submitted her resignation, the petitioner demanded Child Care Leave for a pe...
Umed Singh Dahiya Vs. Delhi State Cooperative Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-26-2011
1. W.P. (C) No. 4163 of 1992 has been filed by Mr. M. R. Bhardwaj on 25th November 1992 seeking quashing of seniority list and office order dated 17th November 1992 issued by Respondent No. 1, Delhi State Cooperative Bank Limited ('the Bank'), in relation to accounts officers of the Bank. 2. Rule was issued in the writ petition on 10th November 1993 and the interim order dated 11th December 1992, to the effect that any promotion made shall be subject to further orders, made absolute. 3. W.P. (C) 396 of 1993 was filed by Mr. Umed Singh Dahiya on 18th January 1993 seeking quashing of the same seniority list dated 17th November 1992. In this writ petition rule was issued on 19th July 1993. 4. In the counter affidavit filed in both the writ petitions, a preliminary objection was raised to the maintainability of the writ petitions against the Bank. Inter alia, it was contended by Respondent No. 1 Bank that the decision to promote Respondents 4 to 11 as accounts officer from the grade of cle...
Kamlesh Kumar Pandey Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-26-2011
1. Employed as a Constable with CISF, responding to an advertisement issued by the Staff Selection Commission for appointment to post of Sub-Inspector under 'Central Police Organizations', petitioner found his name in the select list prepared by the Staff Selection Commission. 2. Options given in order of preference by the petitioner were: (i) CISF (ii) BSF (iii) SSB (iv) CRPF and (v) ITBP. 3. Petitioner was intimated that he was selected for the Central Para-Military Force, BSF. Submitting a technical resignation with CISF, petitioner joined BSF and while undergoing basic training was informed that his appointment was invalid on account of petitioner being over age when he had applied for the post in question. 4. Petitioner rushed to this Court, admitting that for appointment under BSF he was over age, but claims that he should not be penalized for the default of SSC and thus urges that on said reason his appointment under BSF needs to be restored. It is pleaded that 2 similarly situa...
Naresh Kumar Vs. Kalawati and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-25-2011
1. Vide the instant petitioner the petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 30.11.1995 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby, both the accused persons were acquitted for the offence under Section 498A/302/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860, in case FIR No.439/1991, Police Station Hari Nagar, by giving them benefit of doubt. 2. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of the Trial Court, petitioner has filed the instant revision petition before this Court. The same was disposed-of vide order dated 12.09.2001 without going into any of the grounds because of the fact that none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. With the help of ld. amicus curie, the instant petition was dismissed. 3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of this Court, the petitioner challenged the same before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing a Special Leave Petition. The Supreme Court vide its order dated 25.02.2009 had set aside the order passed by this Court and remitted the matter back for a fres...
M.T. Verghese Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-25-2011
1. The prayer in this petition is for quashing the decisions dated 1st October 1987 and 2nd June 1989 of the Mazagon Dock Ltd. ('MDL'), Respondent No. 2, denying the Petitioner pay and allowances granted to other draughtsmen working under Respondent No. 2 and denying due confirmation to the Petitioner with effect from the date when he completed six months' service under Respondent No. 2. 2. The Petitioner was appointed as draughtsman in the Directorate of Naval Design, Naval Headquarters in MDL at New Delhi on 20th May 1981 on a temporary/casual basis for a period of six months. He was given a consolidated salary of Rs. 800 per month. The Petitioner joined the services of MDL on 3rd June 1981. On 1st July 1982 the Petitioner made a representation to the MDL headquarters at Mumbai that his services should be regularised as he had completed more than one year of service. He thereafter made three similar representations. The MDL, on 27th July 1984, informed the Petitioner that he had been...
Smt.Manju Tiwari Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-25-2011
1. This is the second round of litigation fought by the petitioner against the Union of India. It is her first round of litigation against the State of Uttar Pradesh. 2. Claim of the petitioner before the Armed Forces Tribunal has resulted in defeat when, vide impugned order dated 18.2.2001, OA No.78/2010 filed by the petitioner was dismissed. 3. The facts on which the first round was litigated are the same as the instant round of litigation. 4. Enrolled in the Army, husband of the petitioner was deployed at the Indo-Pak Border in the State of Rajasthan during May 1999 when Kargil War was fought in the Northern Sector i.e. the line of control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Though war was being fought at the line of control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Army units deployed at the Border in the State of Rajasthan were on high alert. While on duty at 3:25 hours on 11.8.1999 late husband of the petitioner suffered cardiac respiratory failure and unfortunately died. 5. Since h...
State Vs. Ram Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-25-2011
1. The state seeks leave to appeal, in this petition, against a judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge (hereafter "ASJ") dated 27.08.2010, in SC No. 28/2010, by which he acquitted the respondents of the charge of committing offences punishable under Sections 302/376/377, Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). 2. The prosecution case is that on 18.07.2005 Police Station SP Badli received information (through DD No. 41B) that at about 06:05 PM the body of a girl was discovered in Sharadanand Colony. Thereafter complainant Sarita (mother of the deceased) went to police station SP Badli to file a report that her daughter Kanchan was missing. On reaching the police station she was informed that the body of a girl lying in a Jhuggie, at Bhalsva Dairy was found. She was asked to first look at the body to ascertain whether it was her daughter Kanchan. The body was lying inside the bushes and was naked below the waist; a salwar was tied around the neck of the body. Complainant (PW-2, Sarit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »