Delhi Court May 2012 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
M/S. Marudhar Services Ltd. and Another Vs. Ved Parkash and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-04-2012
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. (ORAL) 1. The respondent No.1/plaintiff No.1 has died during the pendency of the appeal and an oral request of learned counsel for the parties is accepted, whereby respondent No.2/plaintiff No.2 being the wife of respondent No.1/plaintiff No.1 is substituted as a legal heir of respondent No.1/plaintiff No.1. The name of respondent No.1 is, accordingly, deleted from the array of parties. For the sake of convenience the original plaintiffs are referred to as the respondents/plaintiffs. 2. The challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned judgment of the trial Court dated 16.4.2004 decreeing the suit of the respondents/plaintiffs for arrears of rent and mesne profits. The respondents/plaintiffs have also filed cross-objections in this appeal, inasmuch as, the respondents/plaintiffs claim that the arrears of rent ought to have been granted at Rs.10,000/- per month and not Rs.6,000/...
Karam Veer Singh and Others Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-04-2012
M.L. MEHTA, J. 1. The present revision is being preferred to challenge the impugned order of charge dated 9th January, 2012 and 25th January, 2012 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge ordering framing of charges under Sections 147/148/149/308/323/325/452/427 IPC against all the petitioners and separately charging petitioner No. 1 and 2 under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989(in short the SC/ST Act). 2. The brief facts that led to the present petition are that an FIR No. 178/2009 was registered on 7th July, 2009 alleging that on 6th July, 2009 at about 10 p.m at house No. 691, Bhola Nagar all the petitioners in furtherance of common object formed an unlawful assembly and entered Complainant Anil Kumar’s house and gave beatings to him and his other relations namely Kishan Pal, Monu, Roop Chand, Aakash, Vinod Kumar and Arun with dandas, wooden sticks and rods also broke the household goods and damaged the windscreen o...
State Vs. Rajender Singh and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-04-2012
S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J. (OPEN COURT) Crl. M.A. 20064/2011 (Exemption) For the reasons mentioned in the application, the application is allowed. Crl.A. 20064/2011 is accordingly disposed of. Crl. L.P.613/2011 1. After hearing counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the leave sought in this case ought to be granted. The Registry is accordingly directed to list the Criminal Leave Petition as Criminal Appeal. Crl. A. (to be numbered) 2. This appeal is against the judgment and order of the learned ASJ dated 18.03.2011 in S.C. No. 111/2009. With consent, the case was heard finally today since the Trial Court records were made available to this Court. 3. The FIR in this case pertains to an incident of 03.03.2007, in which one Krishan Dutt, an injured victim made his statement, which forms the basis of the FIR. The injured witness said that on 03.03.2007 at about 09.30 PM, when he reached near T.R. Sahani Motors on the Wazirabad Road, whilst on his way home, two boys accosted him, sto...
Sunita Vs. Bharat Bhushan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-04-2012
CM Nos.7160/2009 and 15127/2011 1. The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 16th May, 2007 whereby the learned trial Court granted the decree of divorce to the respondent. During the pendency of the appeal, the parties amicably resolved all their disputes through mediation and the appeal was disposed of in terms of the settlement on 20th January, 2009. 2. The appellant is seeking recall of the order dated 20th January, 2009 and therefore, it is necessary to place on record the complete facts relating to the settlement between the parties. 3. On 8th September, 2008, this case was referred to the Mediation Centre on the prayer of the appellant. 4. On 18th December, 2008, the appellant amicably resolved all their disputes before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. The terms of the settlement were reduced into writing by the learned Mediator and was signed by both the parties. 5. As per the said settlement, the appellant agreed to withdraw the appeal and to hand...
Guggan Singh and Another Vs. Sushila Solanki and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-04-2012
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The Appeal is for reduction of compensation of Rs.12,62,000/- awarded for the death of M.S.Solanki who died in a motor accident which occurred on 12.08.1990. 2. By the impugned judgment dated 25.01.2006, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) held that the accident was caused on account of the rash and negligent driving of the DTC bus No.DHP-3438 which was being driven by the First Appellant in a rash and negligent manner. The bus was owned by DTC, the Second Appellant. 3. The deceased M.S. Solanki was working as a Section Officer in UPSC; he was aged about 34 years and was getting a salary of Rs.3358/-. Evidence was led to prove that the deceased would have been promoted as Under Secretary in the scale of 10,000- 325-10,200/- and his gross salary w.e.f. 01.01.2005 would have been Rs.23,100/-. The Claims Tribunal after holding that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the DTC bus by the First Appellant, doubled the ...
Bhagwat Parshad Aggarwal Vs. Hans Raj Banga (Deceased) and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-04-2012
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. (ORAL) 1. Since the appellant in this case is the counsel who appears in this Court, considering the facts of the present case, at the outset, I put it to the counsel for the appellant who is appearing in person as to whether he wanted time to vacate the premises. The matter was passed over once. The matter was passed over again. The appellant states that he seeks to argue the appeal on merits. I have therefore heard the appellant on merits in this Execution Second Appeal (ESA). 2. This ESA impugns two orders of the Courts below i.e. of the first Court dated 2.7.2010 and of the appellate Court dated 6.3.2012 whereby the objections of the appellant, and who is the real brother of the defendant/Judgment Debtor have been dismissed. It may be relevant to state that the suit for possession which was filed by the respondent No.1/plaintiff/Decree Holder went right upto the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 29.4.2005 held the respondent No.1 to b...
Prem Lata Alfrad Vs. Mata DIn and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-04-2012
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of Rs.1,05,000/- awarded in favour of the Appellant for having suffered injuries in a motor accident which occurred on 07.12.1987. 2. The Appellant was employed as a Nursing In-charge in Hindu Rao Hospital. On 07.12.1987 after finishing her duty at about 2:00 P.M. she was proceeding to her home in Ashok Vihar. She alighted from the bus and boarded a cycle rickshaw for reaching her home. When she was crossing Premvari Bridge, the rickshaw was struck by a truck No.DEL-4649 which was being driven by the first Respondent in a rash and negligent manner. She fell down from the rickshaw and suffered grievous injuries including fracture pelvis, fracture right foot, dislocation of the right shoulder and injuries on right hip and cervical spine. Initially, she was removed to Hindu Rao Hospital, where she remained admitted from 07.12.1987 to 11.12.1987. She was then shifted to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital on 12.12.1983 and remai...
Y.N. Moitra Vs. D.V.B. and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-04-2012
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral) 1. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner has sought to set aside the impugned order dated 18.02.2000 reverting the petitioner to the post of Foreman. 2. It is further prayed that the petitioner be continued in service as A.E. and he is entitled to all the benefits of the post of A.E. from 05.04.1999 till 31.03.2002 with subsequent promotion which he is entitled to as per rules and benefit attached to such promotion. 3. He further sought direction to the respondent to pay the salary and all other benefits from 05.04.1999 to 31.03.2002 to which the petitioner is entitled either as A.E. or for subsequent promotion. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was employed with the respondent as Superintendent(Tech.). In the year 1989-90, one Nahar Singh applied for electric connection which was installed in the village Pooth Kalan within the area of lal dora as per the policy of the D.V.B. and meters Nos. K. No.172496/IP and 172497/IL were installed by...
Shamim @ Bhura Vs. the State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-04-2012
M.L. MEHTA, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. assailing the judgment dated 22.12.2010 whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 489B IPC and was sentenced for a period of 4 years RI with fine of Rs.15,000/-. 2. It is the case of prosecution that ASI Devender received secret information that the appellant used to sell fake Indian currency notes for half price near Gagan Cinema and such information was noted down by him vide DD No.6. After directions from the ACP, a raiding party consisting of ASI Devender, Head Constable Pramod, Head Constable Dilawar, Constable Ravinder, Constable Kishan Kumar, Constable Anju and Constable Parvez Alam was formed and the party reached near SDM Office, Sunder Nagri along with the secret informer on 06.04.2007 at about 3.30 P.M. At about 4.15 P.M., the appellant/accused came towards Gagan Cinema and on the direction of the secret informer, Constable Ravinder, who was deputed as a decoy customer, went towards him. Constable Ravinde...
Mukesh Kumar and Others Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-04-2012
VEENA BIRBAL, J. 1. These three appeals are filed against the impugned judgment dated 3rd February, 2010 passed in Sessions Case No.49/2008 by the Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi arising out of FIR No.193/2004 Police Station Dwarka u/s 302 IPC wherein all the three appellants have been convicted u/s 302 IPC. The appellants Deepak and Hari Singh are further held guilty and convicted for committing the offence u/s 404 IPC. The appeals are also directed against the order of sentence dated 18th February, 2010 wherein all the three appellants have been sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- each under section 302 IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for three months. For committing offence u/s 404 IPC, appellants Deepak and Hari Singh have been further sentenced to undergo RI for a period of one year with fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of fine to undergo RI for a period of one month. It is further directed that both the sentences shal...
- ‹ Prev
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- Next ›
- Last »