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.
Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:22. d July, 2013 % + RFA 730/2003 DELHI SIKH GURDWARA MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Jasmeet Singh with Mr. Saurabh Tiwari, Advs. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Defendants Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Adv. for R1&2. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.This appeal impugns the judgment dated 2 nd June, 2003 of the learned Addl. District Judge in the suit No.170/1997 (old No.549/1993) filed by the appellant/plaintiff deciding the preliminary issue framed against the appellant/plaintiff and resultantly holding the said suit to be not maintainable and dismissing the same.2. The appellant/plaintiff had filed the suit from which this appeal arises for perpetual injunction to require the respondents/defendants to give peaceful possession of ancient historical Basant Gurudwara along with its residential quarters, lands and moveables to the appellant/plaintiffs.3. The case of the ap...
Shri Anup Kumar Kamal and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:18. 07.2013 Pronounced on:22. 07.2013 + W.P.(C) 569/2013, C.M.1094/2013 SHRI ANUP KUMAR KAMAL & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through : Sh. Ashish Bhagat, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Roshan Lal Goel, Advocate, for NDMC. Sh. Sunil Kumar, Advocate, for Resp. No.1. Ms. Rachna Srivastava, Advocate, for Resp. Nos. 2 and 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT % FACTS 1 In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, owners and in possession of the property situated in Model Basti Village Sidipura are aggrieved by the refusal and inaction of the respondents in making any orders towards release and denotification of their lands (hereafter suit lands). The suit lands were W.P.(C) 569/2013 Page 1 notified for acquisition under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Ac...
Rediff.Com India Ltd. Vs. E-eighteen.Com Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
$~40. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on: % + 01.07.2013 22.07.2013 C.S. (OS) No.1115/2008 REDIFF.COM INDIA LTD. Through: ..... Plaintiff Ms. Sunita Sridharan, Advocate versus E-EIGHTEEN.COM LTD. Through: ..... Defendant Mr. Mrinal Bharti, Advocate CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit alleging infringement of the plaintiffs copyright in the following literary and artistic work, of the plaintiff of which the plaintiff has obtained registration from the Registrar of Copyrights:2. Consequently, the plaintiff has sought the following reliefs in the suit: a) An order for permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their directors, officers, servants and agents and all others acting for and on their behalf from using or otherwise copying, selling, offering for sale, distributing, issuing to the public, counterfeit/ unlicensed versions of the Plaintiffs virtual analog...
V.K.Jindal Vs. Delhi Vidyut Board and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % V.K.JINDAL W.P.(C) No. 5129/1998 Through:22. d July, 2013 ......Petitioner Ms. S.Janani, Adv. and Mr. Sunando Raha, Adv. VERSUS DELHI VIDYUT BOARD & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner who was appointed by the respondent no.1/Delhi Vidyut Board as an Inspector on 5.9.1973, seeks promotion to the post of Superintendant (Technical) w.e.f 29.8.1989.2. A reference to the writ petition shows that the petitioner has not stated as to what are the recruitment and promotion rules for being appointed to the post of Superintendant (Technical). Petitioner has also not stated as to how he had the qualification which met the requirements for the post. The Recruitment and Promotion Regulations are stated to be marked as Annexure-1, however the Recruitment and Promotion Regulations are not of the post of Superinte...
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. Yogesh Baweja and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 17, 2013 Judgment Pronounced on: July 22, 2013 CM(M) 168/2011 & C.M. Nos.3187/2011 & 1321/2013 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Ashwini Kr.Mata, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Rahul Tyagi, Adv. versus YOGESH BAWEJA & ANR Through ..... Respondents None AND + CM(M) 169/2011 & C.M. No.3189/2011 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Ashwini Kr.Mata, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Rahul Tyagi, Adv. versus DEEPAK SAXENA & ORS Through ..... Respondents None AND + CM(M) 170/2011 & C.M. No.3191/2011 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Ashwini Kr.Mata, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Rahul Tyagi, Adv. versus ANIL KUMAR SHARMA & ANR CM (M)No.168/2011 & 16 connected petitions Through None AND + CM(M) 171/2011 & C.M. No.3193/2011 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Ashwini Kr.Mata, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Rahul Tyagi, Adv. versus KAJAL CHOPRA & ORS Through ..... Respondents None AND + CM(M) 172/2011 & C.M. No.3195/2...
M/S Binatone Electronics Ltd Vs. M/S Harman Agencies and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS (OS) No. 1281/1991 Date of Decision:22. 07.2013 M/S BINATONE ELECTRONICS LTD Through: ....Plaintiff Mr Mayank Goel, Advocate Versus M/S HARMAN AGENCIES & ANR Through: ...Defendants Defendants are ex-parte CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA M.L. MEHTA, J.1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs. 20,45,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Forty Five Thousand Only) with interest pendent-lite and future interest @ 18% p.a. It is pertinent to note that the plaintiff company has already gone into liquidation in November 1992 and the Official Liquidator was granted the permission to continue with the suit.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the plaintiff was a company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act 1956 and is engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling television sets and audio systems. The defendant no.1 is a proprietorship concern run by defendant no.2, having a shop cum office at Chandigarh. Vide an agreement da...
Shibdas Mondal Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
$-4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: July 22, 2013 + WP(C) 1514/2012 SHIBDAS MONDAL Represented by: ..... Petitioner Ms.Rekha Palli, Advocate with Ms.Punam Singh, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Saqib, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. The facts of the instant case would reveal that the officers of the Director General of Meteorology fund contrived to cheat the petitioner of his entitlement and the apparent reason we can fathom is that the petitioner comes from a humble background and is a member of a notified Scheduled Caste. It is not in dispute that the Indian Meteorology Department (Group-C & D Posts), Recruitment Rules, which were framed in the year 1987, did not envisage that a Senior Observer has to clear the Basic Meteorology Course as a condition for being promoted till the Rule was amended in the year 1995.2. However, an...
Vinod Kumar Sharma and anr Vs. Virender Kumar Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:22. d July, 2013 CM (M) 1200/2012 VINOD KUMAR SHARMA & ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Gaurav Duggal and Ms. Gauhar Mirza, Advs. versus VIRENDER KUMAR SHARMA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sandeep Gaur, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) + CM (M) 1200/2012 1. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioners for setting aside the impugned order dated 20.10.2012, whereby the application under Order IX Rule 7 CPC filed by the petitioners has been dismissed.2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the case is listed before the Ld. Trial Court on 07.09.2013 for final arguments.3. He further submits that written statement filed by the petitioners may not be taken on record, however, liberty should be given to them to argue the matter before the court below.4. On the other hand, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that he has no objection ...
Naresh @ Koki Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL. A. 201/2003 Date of Decision:22. d July, 2013 NARESH @ KOKI Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Hem C. Vashisht, Adv. along with appellant in person versus STATE OF DELHI Through ..... Respondent Ms. Fizani Husain, APP CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 22nd February, 2003 and order on sentence dated 7th March, 2003 arising out of Sessions Case No.133/2000 in case FIR No. 268/2000, PS Sangam Vihar under Sections 302/307/34 IPC vide which the appellant along with co-accused was held guilty of offence under Section 324/34 IPC and 326/34 IPC. All the accused were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of five years and a fine of Rs.10,000/- each under Section 326/34 IPC, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment of six months. Further rigorous imprisonment for one year was awarded to each of the accused persons under Section 324/34 IPC. Th...
Mange Khan Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:17.07.2013 Judgment delivered on:22.07.2013 CRL.A. 719/2010 & Crl. M.A No. 20265/2012 MANGE KHAN Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Avninder Singh and Mr. Aditya Vaibhav Singh, Advocates versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sunil Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State along with Inspector Rajesh Vijay. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.Crl. M.A No. 20265/2012 1 This is an application filed by the applicant Mange Khan under Section 391 read with Section 311 and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) for recalling PW-6, PW-8 & PW-9 for their further cross-examination. 2 The averments made in the application are to the effect that although admittedly all the aforenoted witnesses i.e. PW-6, PW-8 & PW-9 had been examined and cross-examined but because of the fault of the counsel, no effective cross-examinati...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »