Delhi Court November 2013 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.
Prem Chand Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :11. 11.2013 Judgment delivered on :25.11.2013 CRL.A. 743/2009 PREM CHAND Through versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through ..... Appellant Mr. Rajesh Khanna, Adv. ..... Respondent Ms. Richa Kapoor, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 08.07.2009 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the IPC as also under Section 25 read with Section 27 of the Arm Act. He had been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life specifically stating that the appellant shall not be considered for parole till he has served twenty years of incarceration. He was also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. No separate sentence had been passed under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2 The case of ...
Ghanshyam Dass Gupta Vs. Makhan Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:25. h November, 2013 + RFA No.664/2003 GHANSHYAM DASS GUPTA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Satyavan Kundalwal, Adv. Versus MAKHAN LAL Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Bharat Bhushan Gupta, Adv. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 The appeal impugns the judgment and decree (dated 29.03.2003 of the Court of Additional District Judge (ADJ) in Suit No.96/2002 filed by the respondent) of recovery of Rs.2,65,000/- with costs and interest from the appellant.2. Notice of the appeal and the application for stay was issued. Vide order dated 05.12.2003, the appeal was admitted for hearing, Trial Court record requisitioned and execution stayed without imposing any condition of deposit of decretal amount or furnishing security therefor on the appellant. The appeal was, vide judgment dated 13.01.2012 pronounced in the absence of the counsels for both the parties, dismissed. The appellant preferred SLP(C) No.13475/...
Rahmatullah Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on Judgment delivered on :20.11.2013 :25. 11.2013 CRL.A. 260/2000 RAHMATULLAH Through: ..... Appellant Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr. Adv. with Mr. M.Shamikh, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Sunil Sharma, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1. The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 19.01.2000 and 24.01.2000 vide which he had been convicted under Section 302 IPC and had been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-.2. The version of the prosecution had been unfolded in the testimony of the eye-witness Kamal Khan (PW-6). This statement (Ex.PW-6/A) revealed that on 17.10.1995 at about 7:00 p.m. at House No.D-255, J.J.Colony, Khyala accused (Rahmatullah) had come to the house of the deceased (Islam) and asked him to come down stairs; on his reaching down accused started abusing him ...
Neeta Sharma Vs. K.K. Sareen and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:25. 11.2013 FAO(OS) 539/2013 NEETA SHARMA ..... Appellant Versus K.K. SAREEN & ANR ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellants For the Respondents : : Mr R.K. Trakru None CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 12.11.2013 passed by the learned single Judge of this court in IA No.13515/2013 which was an application filed by the appellant/defendant no.1 seeking to amend the written statement in CS(OS) No.1318/2005.2. The amendment that was sought were to incorporate new paragraphs 11,12,13 and 14 in the written statement as legal pleas. Those proposed paragraphs have been set out in the impugned order and for that reason we are not setting out the same herein.3. The learned single Judge has noted that the evidence had already been concluded and the suit was at the stage of f...
Valvoline Cummins Limited Vs. Apar Industries Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI IA167042011 in CS(OS) 2597/2011 Reserved on:11. h September, 2013 Decided on:25. h November , 2013 % VALVOLINE CUMMINS LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sachin Gupta and Mr. Shashi P. Ojha, Advocates. versus APAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED Through: ..... Defendant Mr. N. Mahabir and Dr. Sheetal Vohra, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 By this application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC the Plaintiff seeks ad-interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant in relation to the trademark 4T PREMIUM or any other mark identically or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs mark 4T PREMIUM amounting to infringement of the Plaintiffs registered trademark under No.1261544 or leading to passing off the goods or business of the Defendant as that of the Plaintiff.2. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff contends that the Plaintiff is a 50-50 joint venture of Valvoline International Incorporation, USA and Cummins India Limi...
Satya Khurana Vs. Suminder Singh Reen
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:25. 11.2013 FAO(OS) 492/2013 & CM No.17344/2013 SATYA KHURANA Appellant ... Respondent Versus SUMINDER SINGH REEN Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr Vinay K. Garg For the Respondents : Ms Kamlesh Mahajan CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 23.09.2013 passed by a learned single Judge of this court in IA No.914/2013 which was an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC and section 5 of the Limitation Act read with section 151 CPC for setting aside the ex parted decree dated 26.09.2012. The suit (CS(OS) No.79/2012) had been filed by the defendant seeking specific performance of the sale deed dated 30.11.2011 in respect of the ground floor of the premises bearing No.80/65A, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the suit property). The main point urged by the appe...
R.K. Anand and ors Vs. Delhi Co-operative Housing Finance Corporation ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.7370/2013 & CM Nos.15826/2013, 15827/2013 Date of decision:25. h November, 2013 % R.K. ANAND AND ORS ..... PETITIONERS Through Mr. Bharat Bhushan Bhatia, Adv. with Mr.Akshay Bhatia, Adv. & Mr.Ashok Verma, Adv. Versus DELHI CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS ..... RESPONDENTS Through Mr.Sunil Sabharwal, Adv. for R-1/DCHFC Mr.Arjun Pant, Adv. for R-3. Mr.Anil Kumar, Adv. for R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA GITA MITTAL, J (ORAL) 1. By way of the present petition, the petitioners submit that the members of the Neel Kamal Cooperative Group Housing Society (hereinafter referred to as `Society) has taken loan of Rs.51.52 lacs from the Delhi Co-operative Housing Finance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as DCHFC) to complete the construction of flats for its members. It appears that the Society defaulted in making timely payment of the instalments to the DCHFC. It is als...
Suman Chhabra Vs. Laxmi Bai (Deceased Through Lrs)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. h November, 2013 % + RFA5791999 SUMAN CHHABRA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Rajat Joneja, Adv. Versus LAXMI BAI (DECEASED THROUGH LRs) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Reena Jain Malhotra, Adv. for Ms. Sangeeta LR No.3. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 The appeal impugns the judgment and decree dated 13.04.1999 of the Court of Additional District Judge (ADJ), Delhi of dismissal of suit No.1033/1993 filed by the appellant for specific performance of an Agreement dated 12.06.1989 by the respondent Smt. Laxmi Bai of sale of property No.J-167, ad-measuring 125 sq. yds., Saket, New Delhi to the appellant / plaintiff for sale consideration of Rs.4,75,000/-.2. The appeal was admitted for hearing and vide ex parte ad-interim order dated 13.09.1999, the respondent restrained from transferring, alienating or creating any third party interest in the property or parting with possession of the property. It ...
Shiv Ram Meena Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No.5249/2012 25th November, 2013 SHIV RAM MEENA Through: ......Petitioner Mr. M.K.Bhardwaj, Adv. VERSUS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Arjun Pant, Adv. For R-1. Mr. Pawan K.Khanna, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition, petitioner seeks appointment to the post of TGT (Hindi) in the reserved category with the Nehru Adarsh Senior Secondary School. Petitioner claims that he had the necessary qualifications of graduation and B.Ed degree and accordingly he was called for the interview, and having been selected in the interview he ought to have been given appointment.2. Respondent no.1 is the Director of Education. The school in question namely Nehru Adarsh Senior Secondary School is represented through respondent nos. 2 and 3. Counter-affidavits filed by these respondents show that petitioner was ...
Raghubiri Devi Vs. State (Gnct Govt. of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A.320/1999 RAGHUBIRI DEVI Through: .....Appellant Mr.Uday Gupta and Mr.Hiren Dasan, Advocates. versus STATE (GNCT GOVT. OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State. % Pronounced on : November 25, 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRATIBHA RANI, J1 Whenever a case relating to unnatural death of a young bride within seven years of marriage is reported, it causes ripples not only in the pool of the conscience of the society at large but also throws an open challenge to the judicial system to speak deterrent language so that confidence of common man in the efficacy of law is not undermined. Such type of barbaric crimes against the bride by the husband or in-laws are a slur on the face of humanity in any civilized society.2. However, experience shows, of which we cannot lose sight of, that there is a growing tendency to give such death, colour of murder or dowry death,...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »