Delhi Court July 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.
Brij Raj Tripathi @ Raju Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:24. 07.2013 Judgment delivered on:29. 07.2013 CRL.A. 105/2011 BRIJ RAJ TRIPATHI @ RAJU Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, Advocate versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sunil Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 On 08.08.2003, information was received in the afternoon at 01:30 PM in the local police station Pashchim Vihar that Mohini Srivastava had been murdered at her residence i.e. flat No. 17-C, Second Floor, Green Apartments, Pashchim Vihar. This information had been conveyed in the local police station by Asit Srivastava (PW-3) nephew of the victim. On reaching the spot the victim was found lying in a pool of blood with a sharp stab wound noted on her breast. Signs of strangulation on the neck of the victim were also noted. The walls of the room were also smeared with blood. 2 On the stateme...
JamaluddIn Ansari Azad Vs. State and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 673 OF 201.Date of Decision:29. h July, 2013 JAMALUDDIN ANSARI AZAD Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. S.C.Malhotra,, Advocate with the petitioner in person. versus STATE & ANOTHER Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Rajat Agnihotri, Adv for Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for State with SI Bal Singh, P.S. Mandawali. Mr. Himal Akhtar, Adv for R2. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. The petitioner, vide instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is seeking direction for setting aside the order dated 29.10.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge in Crl.Rev.71/2010 and for quashing the FIR No.596/2010 P.S. Mandawali, Fazalpur u/s 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.2. Briefly put, the facts relevant for the disposal of this petition are that daughter of the petitioner Noor Jahan filed a complaint of dowry demand and harassment agains...
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Vs. Mohd. Anwar Khan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 403/2013 Decided on 29.07.2013 IN THE MATTER OF : DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Advocate with Mr. Sushil Kaushik, Advocate versus MOHD. ANWAR KHAN ..... Respondent Through: None CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The present Criminal Leave Petition has been filed by the petitioner/Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (in short DRI) under Section 378(iv) of the Cr.PC against the judgment of acquittal dated 18.03.2013 passed by the Special Judge for NDPS cases, Saket, New Delhi.2. Before referring to the grounds raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner/DRI for seeking leave to file an appeal against the aforesaid judgment, it is deemed appropriate to briefly refer to the relevant facts of the case.3. In brief, the facts of the case are that on 08.07.2009, the Intelligence Officer of DRI, Headquarters had received a secret information that at about 8.0...
Management of Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Balbir Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:26. 07.2013 LPA 639/2012 MANAGEMENT OF DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Appellant versus BALBIR SINGH ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr Abhay N. Das. For the Respondent : Mr Anil Mittal & Mr Anuj Kr. Ranjan. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J 1.This is an appeal preferred by the Delhi Transport Corporation against the judgment dated 08.02.2012 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition being W.P.(C) 901/2005 filed by the appellant against an award dated 05.04.2004 made by the Labour Tribunal.2. The respondent was employed as a retainer crew conductor with the appellant on 17.03.1981. Initially, the respondent was on probation for one year and was subsequently confirmed. On 23.03.1985, the checking staff of the appellant corporation con...
Satya Veer Singh and ors. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: July 24, 2013 Judgment Pronounced on: July 26, 2013 + W.P.(C) 2512/2012 UTTAM SINGH AND ORS Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.C.Harishankar, Advocate with Mr.S.Sunil and Mr.N.Jagdish, Advocates versus MCD AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Mukesh Sharma, proxy counsel for Ms.Shobha Gupta, Advocate for MCD Ms.Zubeda Begum, Advocate with Ms.Sana Ansari, Advocate for GNCTD Ms.Jyoti Singh, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Saahila Lamba, Ms.Tinu Bajwa and Mr.Amandeep Joshi, Advocates for R-3 to R-7 W.P.(C) 2513/2012 HARISH CHANDRA AND ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.C.Harishankar, Advocate with Mr.S.Sunil and Mr.N.Jagdish, Advocates versus MCD AND ORS Represented by: W.P.(C) No.2512/2012 & conn.matters ..... Respondents Ms.Zubeda Begum, Advocate with Ms.Sana Ansari, Advocate for GNCTD Mr.Alpha Phiris Dayal and Mr.Jindal, proxy counsels for Page 1 of 13 Mr.Sanjeev, Advocate for DPCC Ms.Jyoti Singh, Sr.Advocate with Ms...
Manju and ors. Vs. Naresh Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:2. d July, 2013 Judgment delivered on:26. h July, 2013 % + MAC.APP. No. 693/2011 MANJU & ORS. Through: ..... Appellants Mr. N.K. Jha, Advocate. Versus NARESH KUMAR & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Archana Gaor, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 06.04.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted the compensation as under:1)2) 3) Loss of income------------------------------------Rs. 6,940/Pain and sufferings, loss of amenities-------Rs.50,000/Special diet & conveyance charges----------- Rs.10,000/Total Rs.66,940/- 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 10.07.2007 at about 3.40 pm, the deceased was travelling in DTC Bus bearing not DL-1PB-6839 and was going towards his residence from Azadpur. When the aforesaid bus reached opposite Gate Nos. 4 and 5, Delhi Industrial Area Bus Stand, the driver,i.e., respondent No.1 stoppe...
The Management of Federation of Indian Chambers of Vs. the Government ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) 1564/2007 % Date of Decision: July 26, 2013 THE MANAGEMENT OF FEDERATION OF INDIAN CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY (FICCI) Petitioner Through : Mr.Siddharth Dias, Advocate versus THE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR .... Respondent Through : Ms.Rohini Musa, Advocate for respondent no.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.* 1. By way of this petition, a challenge has been made to the award dated 6th September, 2006 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court-II, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby directions have been issued to the petitioner-management to appoint respondent no.2 on compassionate grounds to the post of Computer Operator or any equivalent clerical post w.e.f. June, 2002.2. Briefly the facts relevant for the disposal of the present petition are as under:The husband of respondent no.2 i.e. late Ashok Kumar was working as a Computer Operator with petitioner/management since June, 1980. After working for...
S.K. JaIn Vs. Gnct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6901/2010 % 26.07.2013 S.K. JAIN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Bansal, Advocate versus GNCT OF DELHI AND ORS. .... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Bansal, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 to 4. Mr. Anurag Mathur, Advocate for respondent No.5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition one Sh. S.K. Jain, who was appointed by the respondent No. 4/College to the post of Administrative Officer on probation basis, impugns the order dated 4.10.2010 terminating his services during the period of probation.2. The law with respect to services of termination of a probationer is now well settled and it has been held by the Supreme Court that a probationer can always be terminated during the probationary period without complying with the principles of natural justice. It has also been held that even if the orders of termination of probation states that t...
Smt. Gurjeet Kaur and ors Vs. Gnct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2571/2011 & CM No.5485/2011 % Date of Judgement:26. 07.2013 SMT. GURJEET KAUR AND ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Rajiv Dewan, Adv. versus GNCT OF DELHI & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Abhishek Dua, Adv. for Mr. V.K. Tandon, Adv. for R-1 to 3. Mr. M.S. Saini, Adv. for R-4. Mr. Sunil Kumar, Adv. for R-5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA 1 There are ten (10) petitioners in the present writ petition. The petitioners were engaged under a scheme to promote Punjabi language by respondent No.4/Punjabi Academy. Respondent No.4 is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and is an instrumentality of State as per Article 12 of the Constitution of India as respondent No.1 finances/funds and also controls the respondent No.4. The petitioners were appointed by the respondent No.4 to the posts of TGT (Punjabi). The appointment letters of the petitioners admittedly in clear cut terms say that their appoin...
Manish Sehgal Vs. Meenu Sehgal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Pronounced on:26. h July, 2013 % + C.R.P. No.40/2013 MANISH SEHGAL Through: ..... Petitioner Mrs. Geeta Luthra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vikas Tomar and Mr. Saman Yadav, Advocates versus MEENU SEHGAL Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Bharat Arora, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The respondent herein filed a petition under Sections 7 and 17 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 read with Sections 6 and 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1890, seeking custody of the minor daughters namely, Ms. Sara Sehgal and Ms. Sana Sehgal. The respondent also filed an application alongwith for the interim custody of children during Diwali holidays.2. After receiving the summons, petitioner appeared and apprised the Court about the facts of the case and further as provided under Section 9 of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1890 filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of the petition due...