Delhi Court April 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.
South Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs. Budh Prakash
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 202/2013 SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Appellant Through: versus BUDH PRAKASH Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Adv. ..... Respondent Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN ORDER % 08.04.2013 LPA 202/2013 & CM 5459/2013 (stay) & CM 5460/2013 (delay) The respondent was engaged as Baildar on muster roll basis with the appellant SDMC. Alleging termination of his service, the respondent raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication. At the time the services of the respondent were terminated, he had put in service of more than one year with the appellant. The Labour Court vide award dated 16.12.2006 held that termination of the services of the respondent was illegal and there was no voluntary act of abandonment of service, by the respondent, as was contended by the appellant. Accordingly, the appellant was directed to reinstate the respondent with effect from 14.6.199...
Virender Singh Vs. Deepak Bhatia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. h March, 2013 Pronounced on:8. h April, 2013 + CRL.L.P. 491/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr.Randhir Jain, Mr.Dhananjai Jain & Ms.Ruchika Jain, Advocates CRL.L.P. 492/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr.Randhir Jain, Mr.Dhananjai Jain & Ms.Ruchika Jain, Advocates CRL.L.P. 493/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr.Randhir Jain, Mr.Dhananjai Jain & Ms.Ruchika Jain, Advocates CRL.L.P. 494/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr....
Virender Singh Vs. Deepak Bhatia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. h March, 2013 Pronounced on:8. h April, 2013 + CRL.L.P. 491/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr.Randhir Jain, Mr.Dhananjai Jain & Ms.Ruchika Jain, Advocates CRL.L.P. 492/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr.Randhir Jain, Mr.Dhananjai Jain & Ms.Ruchika Jain, Advocates CRL.L.P. 493/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr.Randhir Jain, Mr.Dhananjai Jain & Ms.Ruchika Jain, Advocates CRL.L.P. 494/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr....
Virender Singh Vs. Deepak Bhatia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. h March, 2013 Pronounced on:8. h April, 2013 + CRL.L.P. 491/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr.Randhir Jain, Mr.Dhananjai Jain & Ms.Ruchika Jain, Advocates CRL.L.P. 492/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr.Randhir Jain, Mr.Dhananjai Jain & Ms.Ruchika Jain, Advocates CRL.L.P. 493/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr.Randhir Jain, Mr.Dhananjai Jain & Ms.Ruchika Jain, Advocates CRL.L.P. 494/2011 VIRENDER SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Medhanshu Tripathi, Mr.Harish Sharma & Mr.Manoj Sehgal, Advocates versus DEEPAK BHATIA Through + ..... Respondent Mr....
Faris Shuja Jalai @ Anup Vs. Cbi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:19. h March, 2013 Pronounced on:8. h April, 2013 + CRL.REV.P. 18/2013 FARIS SHUJA JALAI @ ANUP Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Mohit Mathur, Mr. Jivesh Tiwari & Ms. Suman, Advocates versus CBI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. P.K.Sharma, Standing Counsel with Mr. Anil Kr. Singh, Advocates for CBI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. By virtue of this Revision Petition, the Petitioner impugns the framing of the charges under Section 120B read with Sections 420/366-A/372/373 IPC and Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic(Prevention) Act, 1956 (the Act) and substantive offences under Section 373 IPC and Section 5 of the Act.2. The learned counsel for the Petitioner urges that infact initially the Petitioner was arrested in a connected case bearing RC not S1/1/2012/S0005 which related to procurement of another girl Riya Lama @ Riya Mothey. Crl. Rev.P.18/2013 Petitioner that the certificate relied upon by the prosecutio...
indu Munshi and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.2574/2010 & CMs 5134/10, 8525/11 & 7028/12 % April 05, 2013 INDU MUNSHI & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. S.K.Ambardar, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Jatan Singh with Mr. Soayib Qureshi, Advs. for R-1 Ms. Purnima Maheshwari, Adv. for R-2. Mr. Sudhir Kathpalia for Ms. Suparna Srivastava, Adv. for MCD. 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 has been filed by fifteen petitioners seeking the reliefs of regularization and equal pay for equal work.2. It is not disputed, and the admitted position is that the petitioners have been employed on contractual basis from time to time. Contractual appointees cannot be regularized in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi & Ors. 2006(4) SCC 1.The following is the ratio which has been laid down ...
Ashok Kumar Krishnalal Patel and anr. Vs. Continental Textile Mills Lt ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
$~01 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CO.APP. 11/2013 ASHOK KUMAR KRISHNALAL PATEL & ANR. ..... Appellant Through Mr. Venkita Subramaniam, Mr. Dharmesh Shah and Mr. Rahul Bansal, Advocates. versus CONTINENTAL TEXTILE MILLS LTD. Through ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL % C.M.No.2197/2013 ORDER 05 04.2013 Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. C.M. 2196/2013 & Co.Appeal 11/2013 1. There is delay of 47 days in filing of the appeal. Before issuing notice on the application for condonation of delay, we have deemed it appropriate to examine the grounds of appeal on merits.2. The appellants predecessor-in-interest had executed two registered perpetual or permanent lease deeds dated 23 rd March, 1918 and 3rd November, 1927 in respect of agricultural lands in favour of Chandulal Karsandas, Mohanlal Vardhmanbhai Narsinhdas Patel and Seth Rathilal Nathalal. Company Appeal 11/2013 an...
Jankalyan Telecom Coop. Store Vs. M.T.Nl. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8169/2005 JANKALYAN TELECOM COOP. STORE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Atul Bandhu, Advocate with Mr. Varun Kumar, Advocate versus M.T.NL. & ORS. Through: % ..... Respondents Mr.V.K. Rao, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vaibhav Kalra, Adv. for R-1. Mr. R.S. Rana, Adv. for R-3. Date of Decision : April 05, 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL ORDER : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.1. After hearing the matter upon remand and carefully scrutinizing the records, it appears that a misrepresentation was made before the learned Division Bench that on an application filed, BSNL was impleaded as Respondent in the Writ Petition. The record shows that though an application was filed by the Petitioner for impleadment of BSNL as party Respondent and reply to the said application was also filed by the BSNL stating therein that the Respondent MTNL has no concern with the property in question, the said application is yet to be disposed of.2. Learned Division Bench...
State of Chhattisgarh Vs. S.K. Sarawagi and Co Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + RESERVED ON:28. 05.2012 PRONOUNCED ON:05. 04.2013 LPA 181/2011 STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Atul Jha with Mr. Sandeep Jha and Mr. Mehernaz Mehta, Advocates. versus S.K. SARAWAGI & CO LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rishi Agrawal, Mr. Akshay Ringe, Ms. Malvika Lal and Mr. Nikhil Rohatgi, Advocate for Resp-1. Mr. Rakesh Tiku, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Sapna Chauhan and Ms. Anjana Gosain, Advocates for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P. GARG MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT For detailed order, please see judgment of even date passed in LPA 592/2010 titled Pushp Steels & Mining Pvt. Ltd. v. S.K. Sarawagi & Co. Ltd. & Ors. S. RAVINDRA BHAT (JUDGE) APRIL 5 2013 LPA 181/2011 S.P. GARG (JUDGE) Page 1...
Mohd. Sahid Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % CRL.A. 649/2011 Reserved on:4. h February, 2013 Decided on:5. h April, 2013 BAHADUR SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr. R.S. Rai, Adv. versus STATE Through: + ..... Respondent Mr.Mukesh Gupta, APP. CRL.A. 552/2011 MOHSIN alias MOTI Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Pradeep Teotia, Adv. versus STATE Through: + ..... Respondent Mr.Mukesh Gupta, APP. CRL.A. 1136/2011 MOHD. SAHID Through: ..... Appellant Ms.Nandita Rao, Adv. Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Mukesh Gupta, APP. versus STATE Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By these appeals, the Appellants impugn the judgment dated 4th March, 2011 whereby they have been convicted for offences punishable under Section 394/34 IPC, 457/34 IPC and 411 IPC and in addition Appellants Mohsin and Bahadur were also convicted for offence punishable under Section 397 IPC. As per the order on sentence dated 11 th March, 2011 Appellant Mohd. Shahid was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and t...