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.
Rattan Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2013
$-17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :5. h March, 2013 + CRL.A.21/2006 & CRL.M.A.Nos.6115/2009 & 16443/2010 RATTAN SINGH ..... Appellant Through : Ms.Bhavita Modi, Advocate with Mr.Apurv Chandola, Advocate. 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- Rattan Singh has preferred the present appeal against the judgment dated 23.10.2004 and order on sentence dated 25.10.2004 of Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.122/2003 arising out of FIR No.48/2003 by which he was convicted for committing offence punishable under Sections 20 NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 10 years with fine of ` 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo RI for a period of two years.2. The appellant was apprehended by the police of Polie Station Civil Lines vide FIR No.48/2003 and challaned for committing offence punishable under Section 20 NDPS Act. It was alleg...
The Chairman, Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Vs. Ms. Rajni and o ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : March 05, 2013 + WP(C) 2552/2012 THE CHAIRMAN, DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD & ANR. ..Petitioners Represented by: Ms.Zubeda Begum and Ms.Sana Ansari, Advocates. versus MS. RAJNI & ORS. .....Respondents Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Saini, Advocate for R-1. Mr.Mithilesh Kumar Mishra and Mr.H.S.Sachdeva, Advocates for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. On July 04, 2008 the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi had issued a directive to the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board informing that henceforth results declared by the Board shall be confined only to the number of vacancies for which the requisition is sent.2. Before dealing with the facts of the instant case we would like to pen a few words on the legality of the said directive.3. It is settled law that no candidate has a vested right to ensure that all vacant posts are ...
Nagesh Kumar and anr. Vs. Nagesh Hosiery Exports Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CO.A.(SB) No. 18 of 2008 Reserved on:22. d January, 2013 Decision on:5. h March, 2013 NAGESH KUMAR & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Krishna Kumar with Mr. Kaustubh Shukla, Advocates. versus NAGESH HOSIERY EXPORTS LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Maria, Advocate for R-3. Ms. Sangita Bhayana, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT 05 03.2013 1. This appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) is directed against a judgment dated 11th June 2008 passed by the Company Law Board (CLB), Principal Bench in Company Petition No. 97 of 2006 filed by Appellant 1, Mr. Nagesh Kumar and his wife Appellant 2, Mrs. Renu Mehra. Background Facts 2. The background to the present appeal is that Respondent 2 Mr. Vidya Prakash Mehra, is the father of Appellant 1 Nagesh Kumar, Respondent 3 Mr. Ravinder Kumar and Respondent 4 Mr. Rakesh Kumar. Respondent 2, along with his brother Mr. Dharam Pal was running a partnership...
Vinod Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :1. t March, 2013 DECIDED ON :5. h March, 2013 + CRL.A. 761/2000 VINOD KUMAR Through : ....Appellant Mr.Yogesh Swaroop, Advocate with Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advocate. versus STATE Through : .Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP with Mr.Hemant Kumar, Advocate. SI Vikrant Sharma, PS GTB Enclave. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The appellant- Vinod Kuamr impugns judgment dated 13.11.2000 and order on sentence dated 14.11.2000 in Sessions Case No.33/2000 arising out of FIR No.55/1999 PS M.S.Park by which he was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 363/366/376 IPC and sentenced to undergo SI for seven years with total fine ` 3,000/-.2. Allegations against the accused were that on 04.03.1999 at about 12.15 P.M. he kidnapped prosecutrix X (assumed name), age 16 years when she was alone at her House No.4/8, Gali No.4, Jagjeevan Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi. He committed rape upon her till she remained in his custody ...
Sadiaq HussaIn Vs. Akhand Bharat Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:25. h February, 2013 Pronounced on:5. h March, 2013 + CRL.M.C. 3410/2011 SADIAQ HUSSAIN Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Randhir Jain, Adv. with Mr. Dhananjai Jain, Adv. versus AKHAND BHARAT CHIT FUND PVT. LTD. Through: Mr. Rajat Mittal, Adv. + CRL.M.C. 3455/2011 MOHD.ASFAQ Through: ..... Respondent ..... Petitioner Mr. Randhir Jain, Adv. with Mr. Dhananjai Jain, Adv. versus AKHAND BHARAT CHIT FUND PVT. LTD. ...... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Mittal, Adv. + CRL.M.C. 3481/2011 SADIQ HUSSAIN Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Randhir Jain, Adv. with Mr. Dhananjai Jain, Adv. versus GEER AAR CHIT FUND PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Mittal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. In these three Petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), the Petitioner who is an accused in all the three Complaint Cases Nos.2274/2011, 2277/2011 and 2270/2011 before the learned Metr...
Jagjit Singh Saini Vs. Smita
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2013
$~ 43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 259/2013 % Date of decision: March 5, 2013 JAGJIT SINGH SAINI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.M.Qayam-Ud-Din, Adv. versus SMITA ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.(Oral) % CM No.3879/2013 Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM(M) 259/2013 1. By way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has challenged the order dated 11th January, 2013 passed by the Ld. Additional District Judge(N), Tis Hazari, Delhi whereby the Misc.Civil Appeal no.7/2012 filed by the respondent herein i.e., defendant before the trial court, has been allowed and the ex parte order dated 3rd March, 2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge dismissing her application under order 9 Rule 7 CPC has been set aside.2. The petitioner herein is a plaintiff before the learned trial court and has filed a suit for possession and mesne profits against respondent i.e., defendant before the tri...
Sadiq HussaIn Vs. Geer Aar Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:25. h February, 2013 Pronounced on:5. h March, 2013 + CRL.M.C. 3481/2011 SADIQ HUSSAIN Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Randhir Jain, Adv. with Mr. Dhananjai Jain, Adv. Versus GEER AAR CHIT FUND PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Mittal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. The present Petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment passed today in CRL.M.C. 3410/2011 titled SADIAQ HUSAIN V. AKHAND BHARAT CHIT FUND PVT. LTD.2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned judgment. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE MARCH 05 2013 vk...
Manpreet Singh Talwar Vs. Ravinder Nath Chopra and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 1175/2012 % Date of decision: March 5, 2013 MANPREET SINGH TALWAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. I. Ahmed, proxy counsel for Mr. S.D. Ansari, Adv. versus RAVINDER NATH CHOPRA AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. S.P. Jha, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.(Oral) % 1. By way of present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, a challenge has been made to the order dated 12 th September, 2012 by which the application of the petitioner i.e., defendant no.2 before the trial court seeking recall of the order dated 23rd August, 2011 and 12th January, 2012 and subsequent orders, has been dismissed.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant no.2 has submitted that the respondent i.e., plaintiff before the trial court has filed a suit for recovery of possession, recovery of rent and damages/mesne profits for use and occupation in respect of suit property. CM(M) 1175/2012 petitioner/defend...
The National Trust, Ministry of Social Justice and Vs. Alegion Insuran ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: March 05, 2013 + Arb.P.No.187/2012 THE NATIONAL TRUST, MINISTRY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Gautam Awasthi, Adv. versus ALEGION INSURANCE BROKING LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Mr.S.Ramamani, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The abovementioned petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of the Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties in terms of the Memorandum of Agreement dated 7th March, 2008. The facts are given in para 1 to 5 of the petition. The same are reproduced here as under:1. That the respondent had signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) on 7th March, 2008 with the petitioner whereunder it agreed to undertake the services of a nodal agency to implement Nirmaya Health Insurance Scheme for specific persons with disabilities across the count...
Sajid @ Salman Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:28. h February, 2013 Pronounced on:5th March, 2013 + CRL.A. 371/2012 SAJID @ SALMAN Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Joginder Tuli, Adv. with Mr. Tarun Nanda, Adv. Ms. Ashu Sharma, Adv. Ms. Neha Bahal, Adv. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Jasbir Kaur, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. This Appeal is directed against a judgment dated 03.11.2011 and an order on sentence dated 15.11.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) whereby the Appellant was held guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 376/506(II) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with fine of `2,500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months under Section 376 IPC; and further to pay fine of `500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo SI for one month under Section 506 Part II ...
- ‹ Prev
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- Next ›
- Last »