Delhi Court May 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

Try free for 7 days Semantic AI Search

Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.

May 29 2013

Shalimar Paints Vs. Balaji Paints and Hardware

Court: Delhi

Decided on: May-29-2013

$* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :29. h MAY, 2013 + CRL.A.665/2013 SHALIMAR PAINTS Through : ..... Appellant Mr. S.K. Menta, Proxy Counsel for Mr.Sanjeev Sagar, Advocate. versus BALAJI PAINTS & HARDWARE Through : ..... Respondent None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. Present appeal has been preferred by the appellant against order dated 12.05.2011 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate in complaint case No.1935/2011 whereby the proceedings under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act instituted against the respondent were dismissed for non-prosecution.2. Notice of the leave petition was served to the respondent by way of publication. However, none appeared on behalf of the respondent. Vide order dated 17.05.2013, the appellant was granted leave to appeal. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and have examined the record. It reveals that in the proceedings under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act process was issued to the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 29 2013

Vinod Kumar and ors. Vs. Uoi and anr.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: May-29-2013

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on :21. 05.2013 Judgment pronounced on :29. 05.2013 LA.APP. 128/2004 HARI CHAND ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Satpal Singh, Adv. versus UOI Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Ms. K. Kaomudi Kiran Pathak, advs. for R1/UOI /LAC Mr. Pawan Mathur, Adv. for DDA LA.APP. 129/2004 SIRYA ..... Appellant Through: versus Mr. Satpal Singh, Adv. UOI Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Ms. K. Kaomudi Kiran Pathak, advs. for R1/UOI /LAC Mr. Pawan Mathur, Adv. for DDA LA.APP. 192/2004 JAGMAL(DECD.)THR.LR'S Through: versus ..... Appellant Mr. Satish Kumar Verma, Adv. UOI & ANR Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Ms. K. Kaomudi Kiran Pathak, advs. for R1/UOI /LAC Mr. Pawan Mathur, Adv. for DDA LA.APP. 193/2004 CHANDER MAL & ORS. Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Satish Kumar Verma, Adv. versus UOI & ANR. Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Ms. K. Kaomudi Kiran Pathak...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 29 2013

Puran @ Shankar Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Decided on: May-29-2013

* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Crl. Appeal No. 1112/2012 Reserved on:6. h May, 2013 Date of Decision:29thMay, 2013 % PURAN @ SHANKAR Through Versus STATE Through + ....Appellant Respondent Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP Crl. Appeal No. 855/2012 DHARMENDER @ DHARMU ....Appellant Through Ms. Prerna, Advocate. Versus STATE Through + Respondent Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP Crl. Appeal No. 241/2013 SATYAWAN KATHERIA AND ORS. ....Appellant Through Mr. Ravish Roshan, Mr. Manoj Bansal and Mr. Yunush Advocates. Versus STATE Through + Respondent Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP Crl. Appeal No. 394/2013 RANI @ MANJU Through ....Appellant Ms. Rakhi Dubey, Advocate. Versus STATE Through Respondent Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH SANJIV KHANNA, J.These four appeals by Puran @ Shankar, Dharmender @ Dharmu, Rani @ Manju, Satyawan Katheria and Reshma, arise out of a common judgment dated 3rd April, 2012 by which the appellants have been convicted under Sect...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 29 2013

Vinod Goenka Vs. the Directorate of Enforcement

Court: Delhi

Decided on: May-29-2013

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :06. 05.2013 Decided on :29. 05.2013 + LPA No.79/2013 & CM No.2310/2013 SHAHID BALWA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Rakesh Tiku, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. Vijay Aggarwal and Mr. Mudit Jain, Advs. VERSUS THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Vikas Garg along with Ms. Divya Jyoti Singh, Advs. and Mr. Sandeep Aggarwal, EO/ED. + AND LPA No.80/2013 & CM No.2332/2013 VINOD GOENKA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Aman Lekhi, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. Vijay Aggarwal and Mr. Mudit Jain, Advs. VERSUS THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Vikas Garg along with Ms. Divya Jyoti Singh, Advs. and Mr. Sandeep Aggarwal, EO/ED. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. By the present appeal, the appellants seek to impugn the order dated 24.01.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petitions of the appellants. The present order will dispose of LPA 79/2...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 29 2013

Securities and Exchange Board of India (Trust Pet. N Vs. Crb Capital M ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: May-29-2013

$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CO. APPL. NOS. 1143/2003, 1144/2009, 1145/2009, 1153/2009, 1767/2009, 200/2010, 201/2010, 712/2010, 1941/2010 & 782/2012, 783/2012 & 913/2012 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 379/2009 SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA (TRUST PET. NO.3/1997) ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Neeraj Malhotra & Mr. Shailendra Singh, Advocates Versus CRB CAPITAL MARKETS LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Bhuvan Gugnani, Adv. for R-1, 2 & 3. Mr. Arunabh Chaudhary, Mr. Atanu Chakraborty, & Mr. Gainilung Panmei, Mr. Dorjee Karma, Advocates for Indian Infotech & Software Ltd. Mr. A.N. Haksar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Shiv Sapra & Ms. Deeksha Khurana, Advocate for Sofear Global in CA Nos.1145/2009 and 1941/2010 Mr. Arvind Kr. Gupta, Advocate for applicants in CA Nos.1153/2009 & 1767/2009 Mr. Sumesh Dhawan & Mrs. Vatsala Kak Panda, Advocates for applicant in CA 913/2012 Mr. M.R. Shamshad, Advocate for applicant in CA No.1144/2009. CORAM: HON'...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 29 2013

Bhule Ram Vs. Uoi Andanr.;

Court: Delhi

Decided on: May-29-2013

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 29 2013

Dtc Vs. Karan Singh

Court: Delhi

Decided on: May-29-2013

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on May 20, 2013 Judgment Delivered on May 29, 2013 W.P.(C) 9029/2011 DTC ..... Petitioner Represented by: Ms. Avnish Ahlawat with Mr.Vibhav Mishra, Advocates Versus KARAN SINGH ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Rashmi B.Singh, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.1. In this writ petition challenge is to the order dated August 09, 2011 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench allowing TA No.1068/2009 directing the petitioner to pay to the respondent pension with arrears and interest at the rate applicable under the Provident Fund Scheme. The direction also includes to consider the respondents request for payment of commuted pension in accordance with Rules.2. The facts are not disputed. The respondent had joined the petitioner corporation as Retainer Crew on May 27, 1983 and ultimately brought on monthly rate conductor with effect from...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 29 2013

Babu Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Decided on: May-29-2013

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 837/2010 BABU Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Imran Ahmed, Advocate. versus STATE Through: % ..... Respondent Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP. Date of Decision: May 29, 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Subject matter of challenge in this appeal is the judgment dated 15.12.2009 in Sessions Case No.26/2009 arising out of FIR No.170/2004, Police Station Khajuri Khas, Delhi. The appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 IPC and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. He was further sentenced to 7 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/-, in default 15 days rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act.2. The case of the prosecution emanates from the fact ...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 29 2013