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.
independent News Service Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Anuraag Muskaan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on: April 02, 2013 + OMP No.151/2013 INDEPENDENT NEWS SERVICE PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through Ms.Pratibha M.Singh and Mr.Sumeet Bhatia, Advs. Versus MR. ANURAAG MUSKAAN .... Respondent Through Mr.V.P.Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr.R.R. David, Mr.Mukul Bawa and Mr.Anurag Mathur, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking inter alia, the following relief : a) That the respondent be restrained from in any manner engaging or providing services in violation of the terms of the Agreement to any other television channel during the term of the contract i.e. till 16th January, 2014 and for a period of one year thereafter i.e. 16th January, 2015 either as a presenter, host, anchor, reporter in any other manner in any on-screen role whatsoever or from permitting his name, image, voice or any other pers...
Ram Kishan and Sons Vs. Mohd Haroon Japanwala and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:2nd April 2013 Review. Pet. 172/2013 and CM Nos. 5076-5078/2013 in RC. Rev. 406/2011 RAM KISHAN & SONS ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rupinder Singh Suri, Sr. Adv. and Mr.Sanjeev Sindhwani, Adv. with Mr.Anip Sachthey, Mr.Mohiti Paul, Mr.Saakaar Sardana and Ms. Shagun Matta, Adv. versus MOHD HAROON JAPANWALA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) CM No. 5078/2013 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Review Pet. 172/2013 and CM Nos. 5076/2013 (for condonation of delay in filing the review petition) and 5077/2013(for condonation of delay in re-filing the review petition) in RC. Rev. 406/2011 1. This review petition is directed against the order dated 06.03.2012 whereby the order of the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) decreeing the eviction petition of the respondent/landlord had been upheld.2. Record shows that an eviction petition had ...
Sajid Vs. State (Gnct) of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:1. t April, 2013 Pronounced on:2. d April, 2013 + CRL.A. 481/2009 SAJID Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Charu Verma, Advocate Versus STATE (GNCT) OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. This Appeal is directed against a judgment dated 15.10.2008 and the order on sentence dated 24.10.2008 whereby the Appellant was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of ten years with fine of `2,000/- and in default of payment of fine he was to further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.2. The prosecution version as brought out by PW-2s testimony is that prosecutrix G (name withheld it being a case under Section 376 IPC) was a resident of a five storied building in Mandawali Delhi. Each floor consisted of 15 rooms. PW-2 Darvesh Rai, family o...
Kunwar Pal Singh Vs. C.B.i.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 630/2002 Reserved on:8. h January, 2013 Decided on:2. d April, 2013 % KUNWAR PAL SINGH Through ..... Appellant Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Anurag Jain, Adv. versus C.B.I. Through ..... Respondent Mr. R.V. Sinha, Spl. PP with Mr. A.S. Singh, Adv. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By the present appeal the Appellant challenges the judgment dated 13th August, 2002 passed by the learned Special Judge convicting the Appellant for offences under Section 7 and Section 13 (1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short the PC Act) and the order on sentence dated 14th August, 2002 whereby he has been directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years with fine of Rs.500/- each under Section 7 and Section 13(2) of the PC Act. The fine amount has since been paid, the receipt whereof has been annexed with the present appeal.2. Learned counsel for the Appellant contends that there...
M/S. Thakur Tankers Vs. D.D.A. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4833/2004 M/S. THAKUR TANKERS Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. R.K. Saini, Advocate versus D.D.A. AND ANR. Through: % ..... Respondents Mr. Pawan Mathur, Advocate for the Respondent No.1. Date of Decision : April 02, 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL JUDGMENT : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.1. Rule. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.2. The facts in the aforementioned writ petition succinctly stated are that the Petitioner was carrying on business under the name and style of M/s. Thakur Tankers from a premises bearing No.2-B/1-E, Chara Mandi, Zakhira Chowk, Delhi, built on a plot of land measuring 200 sq. yds. The said premises of the Petitioner were burnt down in the riots of 1984 and before the same could be reconstructed by him, the whole area was taken over by the MCD and DDA for construction of a flyover in 1986. A survey was conducted by the MCD and DDA on the persons doing business therefrom...
Prem Prakash Chaudhary Vs. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: March 07, 2013 Pronounced on: April 02, 2013 + CRL. M.C. 3572/2008 PREM PRAKASH CHAUDHARY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. S.S. Gandhi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Akshay Anand and Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocates Versus DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE ....Respondent Through: Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT 1 Impugned order of 30th August, 2008 affirms trial court's order of 27th January, 2007 and the charge framed on 18th April, 2007 against petitioner and his co-accused for offence under Section 135 (1) (a) of the Customs Act, 1962.2. Petitioner's co-accused-Ashwani was apprehended on 31st October, 1989 when he had come to Air Cargo Complex to take two packages which had arrived by Singapore Airlines and were under surveillance. Upon search of Ashwani's car, pieces of watches, VCRs, etc., collectively valued at `60,77,000/- were recovered alongwith some documents and bill of entry, and the sa...
K L Suri and ors. Vs. State of Delhi and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:7. h March, 2013 Pronounced on:2. d April, 2013 + CRL.M.C. 1004/2011 K L SURI & ORS. Through ..... Petitioners Mr I.H. Syed, Advocate with Mr Divyesh Pratap Singh, Advocate versus STATE OF DELHI & ANR. Through ..... Respondents Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State. Mr A.K. Vali, Advocate with Mr Tuhin, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. The Petitioners who are the uncles and cousin of Nitin (husband of Respondent No.2) seek quashing of FIR No.24/2011, registered at Police Station (PS) Greater Kailash for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC on the ground that the averments made in the FIR do not constitute an offence against the Petitioners and thus continuing the proceedings on the basis of the earlier said FIR is an abuse of the process of court.2. Nitin Suri got married to Samridhi (Respondent No.2) on 24.11.2008 at New Delhi. On 15.12.2008 they proceeded to Uni...
Sanjeev Prabakar and ors. Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: April 02, 2013. + W.P.(C) 5795/2012 SANJEEV PRABHAKAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.S.K.Gupta and Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocates. versus UOI & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Anil Gautam, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(ORAL) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Issue pertaining to the scale in which Junior Hindi Translators were to be placed upon first financial upgradation came to be decided by the Central Administrative Tribunal on April 20, 2004 when O.A.No.2380/2003 was disposed of. The Tribunal noted that the ACP Scheme was introduced pursuant to the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission. The object of the Scheme was to overcome the problem of stagnation. Those who did not earn a promotion within 12 years of joining service became entitled to a financial upgradation. The Tribunal noted that if there ...
Romani Singh Vs. Lt.Col.Vivek Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on: January 31, 2013 Judgment delivered on:April 2, 2013 FAO 39/2012 ROMANI SINGH ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms.Geeta Luthra, Sr.Advocate instructed by Ms.Ashly Cherian, Mr.Harish Malik, Advocates versus LT.COL.VIVEK SINGH + ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.V.Shekhar, Sr.Advocate instructed by Ms.Namita Roy, Mr.Piyush Jain, Ms.Shaveta Chaudhary, Mr.Amit Chobey & Mr.Jatin Rajput, Advocates CONT.CAS (C) 178/2012 ROMANI SINGH ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms.Geeta Luthra, Sr.Advocate instructed by Ms.Ashly Cherian, Mr.Harish Malik, Advocates versus LT.COL.VIVEK SINGH ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.V.Shekhar, Sr.Advocate instructed by Ms.Namita Roy, Mr.Piyush Jain, Ms.Shaveta Chaudhary, Mr.Amit Chobey & Mr.Jatin Rajput, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 47 of The Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinafter ...
Vinod Kumar Vs. Prem Pal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: March 07, 2013 Pronounced on: April 02, 2013 + CRL.REV.P.480/2008 VINOD KUMAR Through: .....Petitioner Mr. Charan Jeet, Advocate versus PREM PAL ....Respondent Through: Nemo CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT 1 Impugned order of 26th May, 2008 upholds petitioner's conviction and sentence for the offence under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. While entertaining this revision th petition, it stands noted in the order of 12 February, 2009 that petitioner has already served sentence of 11 months out of substantive sentence of one year imposed upon him. However, the sentence of compensation of `1,12,000/- imposed was stayed vide aforesaid order.2. Finding returned in the impugned order is as under: "Having heard the arguments and after perusal of the case file I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order of ld. MM for the reasons that complainant has proved his case and accused also does not dis...
- ‹ Prev
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- Next ›
- Last »