Delhi Court November 2013 Judgments

Nirmala Kwatra Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and anr.

Court: Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Reserved on: Judgment Pronounced on: October 08, 2013 November 27, 2013 LPA4352012 NIRMALA KWATRA Through: ... Appellant Mr. Sanat Kumar, Advocate VERSUS INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. & ANR. ..Respondents Through: Mr. M.M. Kalra with Mr. Kunal Kalra, Advocates CORAM: HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT : CHIEF JUSTICE1 The appellant, being aggrieved by the judgment dated 20 th April, 2012 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant herein against termination of her retail outlet dealership by respondent No.1 / Indian Oil Corporation (for short, the respondent Corporation), has preferred the present appeal.2. The appellant, who is a widow of defence officer, was allotted a petrol pump retail outlet under the Defence Category. An agreement of dealership was entered into between the appellant and the respondent Corporation on 28th February, 2000 for retail...

SachIn @ Sonu Vs. State and ors.

Court: Delhi

$~10. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1374/2013 % Judgment dated 27.11.2013 SACHIN @ SONU Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.Dinesh Garg, Adv. versus STATE & ORS. Through : ..... Respondents Mr.Saleem Ahmed, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. By the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 21.5.2013 (hereinafter referred to as the first impugned order) passed by Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, North-East, Delhi, in case No.1828/44/Ext.Cell/NE/NE District, whereby externment of the petitioner from the local limits of Delhi was directed. The petitioner also seeks quashing of the order dated 31.7.2013 (hereinafter referred to as the second impugned order) passed by Lieutenant Governor, Delhi, whereby Appeal No.102/2013 filed by the petitioner, against the order of externment dated 21.5.2013, was dismissed.2. The necessary ...

Lal Bahadur Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2013) 4 SCC 557; [2013] 5 SCR 744

$~R-29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: November 27, 2013 + CRL.A. 161/2005 LAL BAHADUR ..... Appellant Through: Ms.Priyanka Kapoor, Amicus Curiae versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP. G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22.1.2005 and order on sentence dated 24.01.2005. Case of the prosecution as noticed by the Trial Court is as under:(1) Brief facts of the case of prosecution are that on 5.3.2001 a complaint was filed by one Hukum Singh S/o Dunger Singh R/o 503, Chatta Lal Mian, Chandhi Mahal, Delhi that he is residing at the above address and is a business man and that houses No.503 and 444 Chhatta Lal Mian, Chandni Mahal, Delhi is his ancestral property. Complainant stated that he is residing in House No.503, Chhatta Lal Mian, Delhi along with his brother Prabhu Singh, whereas house No.444 Chatta Lal Mian, Delhi is occupied by the sons of Gopal Singh i.e. grandsons of his tau/uncle...

Dharmender Singh Vs. State Nct of Delhi and ors.

Court: Delhi

$~06. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1724/2012 % Judgment dated 27.11.2013 DHARMENDER SINGH Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.Sameer Chandra, Adv. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Mr.Saleem Ahmed, ASC for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. By the present petition, petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to remove the name and entries related to the petitioner from the surveillance registers No.10 and 11 being maintained in the Police Station, Sagar Pur and from other records on the ground that on being enlisted, he is being treated as a bad character.2. The necessary facts which gave rise to filing of the present petition are that the petitioner claims himself to be a property dealer, who is residing with his mother, wife, two daughters and a school going son, who are all dependent upon him. It is claimed that the petitioner is leading a peaceful and respectable life.3...

Tasvir Singh Vs. State of Delhi

Court: Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :20. h NOVEMBER, 2013 DECIDED ON :27. h NOVEMBER, 2013 + CRL.A. 578/2000 & CRL.M.A.Nos. 1497/2007 & 1498/2007 TASVIR SINGH Through : ....Appellant Mr.Prag Chawla, Advocate with Mr.Saurabh Shoken & Mr.C.R.Sagar, Advocates. VERSUS STATE OF DELHI Through : .Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Tasvir Singh (the appellant) impugns the correctness of a judgment dated 11.09.2000 in Sessions Case No.22/96 arising out of FIR No.157/95 PS Narela convicting him for offence under Section 326 IPC. By an order dated 12.09.2000, he was awarded RI for three years with fine ` 500/-. The case of the prosecution as projected in the charge-sheet was that on 22.05.1995 at about 09.15 P.M. at village Bakner, Harijan Basti, the appellant inflicted injuries to Satpal in an attempt to murder him. During investigation, statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. The accused was arres...

Tea Trade Tech. Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Corporate Services and anr.

Court: Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:27. h November, 2013. + RFA3022009 TEA TRADE TECH. PVT. LTD. & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Bharat Ahuja, Advocate. Versus CORPORATE SERVICES & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Atul Batra, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. The appeal impugns the judgment and decree dated 30th April, 2009 of the Court of the Additional District Judge (ADJ), South-II, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in Suit No.247/2008 filed by the appellants/plaintiffs, to the extent the same denies to the two appellants/plaintiffs the arrears of rent and consultancy charges.2. Notice of the appeal was ordered to the issued and the three respondents/defendants were proceeded against ex-parte. Vide judgment dated 15th November, 2011, the appeal was allowed and a decree was passed in favour of the appellants/plaintiffs and against the three respondents/defendants for recovery of Rs.25,000/- per month from 1st...

Guru Nanak Dev University Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA2712009 & CM APPLS. 8202/2009, 8203/2009, 8206/2009 GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ashok K. Mahajan, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sushil Dutt Salwan with Mr. Divy Pratap, Advocates Date of Decision :27. h November, 2013 % CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present letters patent appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 3rd October, 2008 passed by learned Single Judge, whereby appellants writ petition being W.P.(C) 4175/2007 was allowed and the order/letter dated 9th May, 2006 issued by respondent No.2 was set aside. The relevant portion of the impugned order reads as under:11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The bone of contention between the parties is the above mentioned Rule No.III of the Handbook of Rules and Regulations for Inter University Tournaments. It is an admitted case...

Anand K.Mishra Vs. Delhi Police and ors

Court: Delhi

#6 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8127/2012 & CM APPL. 20198/2012 ANAND K.MISHRA Through: ..... Petitioner Petitioner in person. versus DELHI POLICE AND ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC with Mr. Aditya Singla Mr. Satyam Thareja and Mr. Sanbah Rumoy, Advocate for Delhi Police. Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari, CGSC with Mr. Akshay Chandra, Advocate for UOI. Mr. Pawan Kumar, ACP/Conn. Place, Insp. Rajesh Kumar, SHO PS Tilak Marg and SI Pradeep Kumar, PS Tilak Marg, Delhi. Date of Decision:27. h November, 2013 % CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (Oral):1. Present writ petition has been filed in public interest seeking a direction to quash the order dated 22nd December, 2012 promulgating Section 144 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) in India Gate, Central Vista lawns, Rajpath & Connaught Place as unconstitutional, illegal and ultra vires on the ground that it imposed an un...

Dr. T.Renuka and ors. Vs. Government of National Capital Territory of ...

Court: Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.9063/2011 % 27th November, 2013 DR. T.RENUKA & ORS. ......Petitioners Through: Mr. Zeeyaul Haque, Adv. VERSUS GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. D.Rajeshwar Rao and Mr. Charanjeet Singh, Advocates with Mr. Raj Kumar, Statistical Assistant for R-1. Mr. Nishant Nigam, proxy counsel for Mr. Siddharth Dias, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Petitioners are employees of respondent no.2-Family Planning Association of India. Family Planning Association of India has two sets of employees. One set of employees are those employees who like the petitioners became part of the department of respondent no.2 which was fully funded by the government for a family planning project. Respondent no.2 is otherwise a private NGO. The second set of employees are private employees of this private NGO who do not fo...

Mrs. Pushap Mala and ors. Vs. Uoi and ors.

Court: Delhi

R-141 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.2973/2000 27th November, 2013 % MRS. PUSHAP MALA & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioner Dr. Aurobindo Ghose, Advocate Versus UOI AND ORS. Through: Respondents Mr. R.S. Mathur, Advocate CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. In this writ petition, though there are many reliefs prayed as per the prayer clauses, effectively two reliefs are claimed. First is that the deceased husband of the petitioner No.1 late Sh. Prem Prakash should not be taken to be on illegal leave from 14.6.1989 to 5.6.1994 and he should get all monetary benefits as payable to an employee for this period without his service being treated dies non. The second relief claimed is that petitioner, should be awarded damages of Rs. 50 lakhs on account of harassment of the late husband of the petitioner No.1 as also petitioners themselves.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2/empl...