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.
Ranjana Sood Vs. Ndmc and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.4095/2010 % March 14, 2013 RANJANA SOOD Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. Mohit Sood, Adv. versus NDMC AND ORS Through : ..... Respondents Ms. Madhu Tewatia, Adv. for NDMC. Mr. B.B. Gupta, Adv. for R3 & 3(a). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a writ petition totalling to about 85 pages, wherein Prayer Clause runs from (a) to (s).2. De hors the aspect of the number of prayers made, counsel for the petitioner says that essentially, there are two aspects under challenge. First is the issue of suspension of the petitioner. The second aspect is the challenge to the departmental proceedings which have been initiated against the petitioner.3. So far as the aspect of suspension is concerned, it is not disputed that the suspension of the petitioner has been recalled and therefore, this relief does not survive.4. So far as the relief of stay of departmental proce...
Shri Binder Vs. Smt. Veena and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + R.S.A. NO.79/2009 & CMs 9088-89/2009 Decided on :14. h, March 2013 SHRI BINDER Through: Appellant Mr.P.S.Mehandru, Advocate. Versus SMT. VEENA & ORS. Through: Respondents Nemo CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.1. This is a regular second appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 24.9.2008 passed by the appellate Court rejecting the appeal of the appellant.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. The substantial question of law which has been formulated in the appeal reads as under:Whether the terrace/roof of single storey house let out to tenant with exclusive possession is appurtenant to the main building and hence part of the tenanted premises? 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant with regard to the formulation of the substantial question of law which is a pre condition for admission of the regular second appeal.4. In my considered opinion, the substantial question of law formulated in...
Union of India and ors Vs. Kamal Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
$~16 to 19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on : March 12, 2013 Judgment pronounced on : March 14,2013 LPA 531/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through : ..... Appellants Mr. Baldev Malik, Adv. versus KAMAL KUMAR ..... Respondent Through : + Mr. L.P.Dhir and Mr.Vikas Nautiyal, Advs. LPA 532/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through : ..... Appellants Mr. Baldev Malik, Adv. versus KAMAL KUMAR ..... Respondent Through : + Mr. L.P.Dhir and Mr.Vikas Nautiyal, Advs. LPA 534/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through : .... Appellants Mr. Baldev Malik, Adv. versus RAMAN KUMAR ..... Respondent Through : LPA 531/2012 Mr. L.P.Dhir and Mr.Vikas + LPA 540/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through : ..... Appellants Mr. Baldev Malik, Adv. versus KAMAL KUMAR L.R. Through : ..... Respondent Mr. L.P.Dhir and Mr.Vikas Nautiyal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN ORDER % 12.03.2013 CM 12463/2012(delay in filing the appeal for 136 days) CM 12469/2012(delay in filing the...
Surender Krishan Seth Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : March 06, 2013 DECIDED ON : March 14, 2013 + CRL.A. 869/2011 SURENDER KRISHAN SETH ..... Appellant Through : Ms.Anu Narula, Advocate. versus THE STATE Through : ..... Respondent Ms.Fizani Husain, APP. SI Deepak, PS Narela. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The appellant-Surender Krishan Seth impugns judgment dated 07.12.2010 and order on sentence dated 20.12.2010 in Sessions Case No.270/2007 arising out of FIR No.451/2007 registered at Police Station Narela by which he was held responsible for committing rape and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine `5,000/-.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on 17.08.2007 in between 01.00 to 02.00 P.M. at House not A-159, Phase-1, Metro Vihar, he committed rape upon X (assumed name), aged 30 years. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses. In his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the accused alleged that the complainant wanted to grab his plot of land and falsely ...
Si (Cm) D.C. Tiwari and ors. Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :14. h March, 2013. % + W.P.(C) 6583/2000 SI(CM) D.C.TIWARI & ORS. Through ..... Petitioner Mr. N.L. Bareja, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. Through ..... Respondent Ms. Mansi Gupta, Advocate for Ms. Archana Gaur, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioners, who were recruited and were serving with Indian Tibetan Border Police Force (hereinafter referred to as ITBPF) at the relevant time, are challenging the Recruitment Rules of 1999 and Standing Order No. 10/2000 dated 27th July, 2000 issued by the respondents on the ground that it has adversely affected the service conditions, especially chances of promotion.2. Relevant facts for the purpose of this judgment are that the petitioners joined the ITBPF sometimes in 1970s. ITBPF was earlier a unit of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and governed by the terms of its enactment. The se...
Mahender Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
$-32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :14. h March, 2013 + CRL.A. 127/2005 & CRL.M.B.1833/2006 MAHENDER ..... Appellant Through : None. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. The appellant- Mahender challenges judgment dated 18.12.2004 and order on sentence dated 03.01.2005 in Sessions Case No.89/2001 arising out of FIR No.281/2001 PS Shalimar Bagh by which he was convicted for committing offence punishable under Section 397 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine ` 1,000/-. He was further convicted under Section 25/27 Arms Act and sentenced to undergo RI for two years with fine ` 500/-.2. Allegations against the accused were that on 05.05.2001 at 09.20 A.M. at Tikona Park, Pitam Pura, he and his associates- Ramdhani, Santosh Kumar Aggarwal @ Bhaiya and Pappu robbed complainantKhairatilal of his scooter bearing No. DL 1SK 262.containing ` 60,000/. The assailants wer...
Ex. Constable Shiv Chand (901321718) Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:14. 03.2013 + W.P.(C) No.6158/2002 EX. CONSTABLE SHIV CHAND (901321718) ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Shekhar Kumar, Adv. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ankur Chibber, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) 1. The Petitioner challenges his dismissal pursuant to an enquiry held by his employer, the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), in respect of an alleged misconduct which occurred sometime in the end of January, 2000. The Petitioner joined the service of the CRPF in 1990.2. The Respondent CRPF served Articles of Charges which levelled three allegations. The relevant extract of the Memorandum of Charges containing the Articles of Charges dated 19.5.2000 is extracted below: ARTICLE I WP(C) No.6158/2002 Page 1 That No.901321718 Ct. Shiv Chand while posted and functioning as protection/escort duty of OC D/3 Bn CRPF v...
Corporate Aircraft Funding Company Llc Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:12. 02.2013 Judgment delivered on:14. 03.2013 % + W.P.(C) 792/2012 CORPORATE AIRCRAFT FUNDING COMPANY LLC ..... Petitioner Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner: Mr Amit Sethi, Mr A. Aggarwal & Mr Aman Gandhi, Advs. For the Respondents: Ms Anjana Gosain, Adv. for R-1. Mr S.K. Dubey, Ms Zeenat Masoodi & Ms Bhagyashree Rati, Advs. for R-3. CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J 1.The petitioner before me, is the mortgagee of Bombardier Challenger Aircraft 300, bearing manufacturers serial no. 20174 (hereinafter referred to as the `Aircraft), assigned call sign VT-RAK, by the Indian authorities. The Aircraft, which is owned by respondent no. 2, i.e., Peel Aviation Ltd (in short PAL), was leased to an Indian company by the name of Golden Wings Pvt. Ltd. (in short GWPL). 1.1 Under a financing arrangement, a loan was extended by the petitioner to...
Dr.Anup Kumar Srivastava Vs. State Thr. Cbi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 2243/2012 & Crl.M.A. 7968/2012 (stay) Reserved on:1. t February, 2013 Decided on:14. h March, 2013 % DR.ANUP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Sidharth Aggarwal, Mr. Gautam Khazanchi, Advs. versus STATE THR. CBI Through ..... Respondent Ms. Sonia Mathur, SC for CBI with Mr. Sushil Dubey, Adv. with Insp. R.L. Yadav. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By this petition the Petitioner impugnes the order dated 20th January, 2012 passed by the learned Special Judge dismissing the application of the Petitioner under Section 6(A) of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (in short the DSPE Act), the orders dated 1st March, 2012 and 13th March, 2013 taking cognizance in respect of charge-sheet and quashing of RC-AC1 2012-A0001 including all investigation and judicial proceedings originating therefrom.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that it is the admitted position that the Petitioner is a Joint Secre...
V.P. Sharma Through Lrs Vs. Director of Education and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.354/2000 % March 14, 2013 V.P. SHARMA through LRs Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sarvesh Bisaria, Advocate. versus DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Navratan Chaudhary, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. R.S. Hedge, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner one Mr. V.P. Shrama against two respondents. Respondent No.1 is the Director of Education and respondent No.2 is the school where the petitioner was employed, namely Delhi Kannada Sr. Secondary School. By the writ petition, the petitioner claims appropriate writ or directions against the respondents to release the provident fund, gratuity, leave encashments etc, alongwith interest, for the period for which the petitioner worked with the respondent No.2-school.2. The facts of the case are that petitioner was emplo...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »