Delhi Court March 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.
Dev Pal Vs. the State (N.C.T. of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :22. d February, 2013 DECIDED ON :15. h March, 2013 + CRL.A. 354/2000 DEV PAL Through : ....Appellant Mr.Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate. versus THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) .Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.The present appeal stands dismissed in terms of a detailed common judgment delivered today which is placed in the file of Crl.A.No.353/2000 titled Raj Pal vs. The State (N.C.T. of Delhi). (S.P.GARG) JUDGE MARCH 15 2013...
Avnita Ahluwalia and anr Vs. Vikaas Ahluwalia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:15.03.2013 + FAO (OS) No.147/2013 AVNITA AHLUWALIA & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Prasoon Kumar, Mr. Kshitij Kumar & Mr. Deepak Chanderpal, Advs. versus VIKAAS AHLUWALIA Through: ..... Respondent Nemo CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.CM No.4492/2013 (Exemption) 1 Allowed subjection to just exceptions. FAO (OS) No.147/2013 2 The appellants are aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 05.03.2013 wherein on the interim application filed by the appellants (original plaintiffs) being the wife and the minor daughter of the respondent, had been granted maintenance @ Rs.75,000/- per month w.e.f. 01.01.2013 as also certain other benefits. These benefits included an air-conditioned car and a driver along with its running and maintenance expenses subject to a maximum of 250 litres of petrol/diesel per month; the school fee including school books and ...
Krishna Kumar Vs. Registrar of Companies
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:5. h March, 2013 Pronounced on:15. h March, 2013 + Crl. M.C.6260/2006 KRISHNA KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Sanjeev Sachdeva, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kaustabh Shukla & Ms. Swati Pant, Advocates Versus REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Baldev Malik with Mr. Arjun Malik, Advocates + Crl. M.C.6273/2006 SUBHASH CHANDRA GUPTA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Sanjeev Sachdeva, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kaustabh Shukla & Ms. Swati Pant, Advocates Versus REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Baldev Malik with Mr. Arjun Malik, Advocates + Crl. M.C.6287/2006 DHARMENDRA KR. LILA Through: Crl. M.C.6260/2006, 6273/2006 & 6287/2006 ..... Petitioner Mr.Sanjeev Sachdeva, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kaustabh Shukla & Ms. Swati Pant, Versus REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Baldev Malik with Mr. Arjun Malik, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. By virtue of these Petitio...
Ajay Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 113/2002 Reserved on:28. h February, 2013 Decided on:15. h March, 2013 % AJAY KUMAR Through: ..... Appellant Mr. A.J.Bhambhani, Ms. Nisha Bhambhani, Ms. Bhavita Modi, Mr. Apurv Chandola, Advocates versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP for the State. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By the present appeal the Appellant impugns the judgment dated 19th September, 2001 whereby the Appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under Sections 366/376 IPC and the order on sentence dated 20 th September, 2001 whereby he has been directed to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/under Section 376 and Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of seven years and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- for offence under Section 366 IPC. Both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. Learned counsel for the Appellant contends that the testimony of the prosecutrix is ...
National Highways Authority of India Vs. Sh.Mukul Saxena
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2013
$~10 to 13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision: March 15, 2013 W.P.(C) 3822/2012 NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.V.K.Rao, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Meenakshi Sood, Ms.Padmapriya, Mr.Mukesh Kumar, Advocate and Mr.M.K.Sinha, DGM (Admn.), NHA versus SH. MUKUL SAXENA Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.S.K.Gupta, Advocate W.P.(C) 3920/2012 NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.V.K.Rao, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Meenakshi Sood, Ms.Padmapriya, Mr.Mukesh Kumar, Advocate and Mr.M.K.Sinha, DGM (Admn.), NHA versus MANOJ KUMAR GARG Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Rajender Khattar, Advocate W.P.(C) 3921/2012 NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.V.K.Rao, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Meenakshi Sood, Ms.Padmapriya, Mr.Mukesh Kumar, Advocate and Mr.M.K.Sinha, DGM (Admn.), NHA versus SUNIL AGGARWAL Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Rajender Khattar, Advocate Ms.Kiran Suri and Ms.A...
M/S R.R. Foundation Engineers (Pvt) Ltd Vs. New Delh Municipal Corpora ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: March 15, 2013 + O.M.P. 29/2013 M/S R.R. FOUNDATION ENGINEERS(PVT) LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Anusuya Salwan with Mr. Vikas Sood, Adv. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION. Through: None .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) 1. Despite of service, no one appears on behalf of respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made her submission on merit.2. The petitioner sought the relief in the petition that the respondent be restrained from invoking the performance bank guarantee No.0034309BG0008335 dated 12 th June, 2009 amounting to `38,78,361/and the original bank guarantee be returned to the petitioner.3. The respondent, NDMC invited tenders for the work of Preservation/Restoration of building in NDMC Area, Gole Market. The petitioner tendered for the said work and being the lowest, the work was awarded in his favour vide Agreement not EE(Spl-Proj.)/5/2009-2010...
Nadeem Vs. State of Nct and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:8. h March, 2013 Pronounced on:15. h March, 2013 + Crl. A.852/2011 NADEEM ..... Appellant Mr.Ayush Gupta, Advocate Through: Versus STATE OF NCT & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State/Respondent No.1. Mr. P.S. Gondi, Advocate for the Respondents No.2 to 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. Appellant who is a victim of murderous assault by Respondents No.2 to 4 approaches this Court under Section 372(proviso) for enhancement of sentence to them as they were released on furnishing bond of good conduct under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958(Act of 1958) after having holding them guilty under Section 307 Indian Penal Code (IPC).2. The Appellant is brother of Wasim. Wasim is husband of Shabnam. Respondents Rashid and Shahid are brothers of Shabnam, whereas Respondent Imran is cousin of Shabnam. It is the case of the prosecution that there was some acrimony b...
Ajay Kumar Vs. Gas Authority of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1163/2012 Judgment reserved on:5. h February, 2013 Judgment delivered on:15. h March, 2013 % AJAY KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. D.K. Aggrawal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate. Versus GAS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Sandeep Prabhakar and Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocates for Respondent No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of the order dated 24.09.2011 passed by the respondent No.1/Disciplinary Authority, whereby the penalty of dismissal from service was imposed upon the petitioner. Also seeking quashing of the order dated 13.01.2012, whereby the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed by the Appellate Authority. The petitioner is seeking relief in the instant petition to reinstate him in service with all back wages.2. Case of the petitioner is that on 13.07.2006, the petitioner initially had applied for regis...
Raj Pal Vs. the State (N.C.T. of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :22. d February, 2013 DECIDED ON :15. h March, 2013 + CRL.A. 353/2000 RAJ PAL Through : ....Appellant Mr.Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate. versus THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) .Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. AND + CRL.A. 354/2000 DEV PAL Through : ....Appellant Mr.Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate. versus THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) .Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The appellants- Raj Pal (A-1) and Dev Pal (A-2) impugn judgment dated 12.05.2000 in Sessions Case No.490/1996 arising out of FIR No. 118/1995 PS Ambedkar Nagar by which they were held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 452/326/34 IPC. Vide order dated 17.05.2000 they were sentenced to undergo RI for two years with total fine ` 3,000/- each.2. Allegations against the appellants were that on 22.02.1995 at about 08.30 P.M. they, in furtherance of common intention, committed criminal house ...
World Phone India Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Wpi Group Inc., Usa
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CO.A (SB) No. 102 of 2012 WORLD PHONE INDIA PVT. LTD. & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. U.K. Choudhary, Senior Advocate with Ms. Srishti Jai Singh, Ms. Maneesha Dhir, Mr. Hemant Sharma and Mr. Kshitij Khera, Advocates versus WPI GROUP INC., USA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Virender Ganda, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.K. Giri & Mr. Shubham Aggarwal, Advocates CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER 15 03.2013 1. The challenge in this appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) is to an order dated 15th November 2012 passed by the Company Law Board (CLB) in an application, CA. No.566 of 2012, in Co. Pet. No. 102(ND) of 2010 filed by the Respondent, WPI Group Inc., USA (WPIGI), to declare a Board meeting of World Phone India Pvt. Ltd. (WPIPL), Appellant No.1 held on 31st October 2012 as null and void.2. The facts in brief for the purposes of this appeal are that Appellant No.1, WPIPL, is a private company incorporated on 7th September 199...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »