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.
Raj Kumar @ Raju Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :12. h July, 2013 + CRL.A. 1476/2011 RAJ KUMAR @ RAJU ..... Appellant Through : Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The appellant-Raj Kumar @ Raju challenges the judgment dated 14.09.2010 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.91/2009 arising out of FIR No.448/2006 registered at Police Station Khajuri Khas by which he was convicted under Section 307 IPC. By an order dated 17.09.2010, he was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years with fine `5,000/.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on 18.10.2006 at about 12.15 A.M., he and his associate Asif Khan (since acquitted) went at Brahma Nands House on motorcycle. It was driven by Asif Khan and the appellant was a pillion rider. The appellant fired shot pointing at Brahma Nand with an attempt to commit murder. DD No.30-A was ...
Mohd. Ayub Ansari and anr. Vs. Shane Alam Ansari
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on:12. 07.2013 + CM(M) 288/2013 MOHD. AYUB ANSARI & ANR. ..... Petitioner Through Mr. S.S. Jain & Mr. R.K. Sharma, Advs. versus SHANE ALAM ANSARI Through ..... Respondent Mr. R.K. Alagh and Mr. P.K. Bhatnagar, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 31st August, 2012 passed by the learned Trial Court whereby application of the petitioner (defendant in the suit) under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC read with Section 151 CPC for amendment of written statement was partially dismissed.2. The said application arose out of suit for specific performance of the contract and consequential relief of mandatory injunction filed by the respondent (plaintiff in the suit) against the petitioners with regard to property bearing no.D-539, Shakur Pur, Anand Vaas, Delhi-110034.3. The said application sought to alter the p...
Dr. Bhikshu Satyapala Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON:23. 05.2013 PRONOUNCED ON:12. 07.2013 % + LPA 464/2000 DR. BHIKSHU SATYAPALA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ravi Shankar Kumar with Ms. Joyoti Kundu Goyal, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rajeeve Mehra, ASG with Mr. Ruchir Mishra and Mr. Mukesh K. Tiwari, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Devender Singh, Advocate for Resp-2. Mr. Dushyant Parashar for Mr. Suryakant, Advocate for Resp-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P. GARG MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT 1 The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order of a learned single judge, dismissing WP 3914/2000. In the writ petition, the selection and appointment of the third respondent to the post of Director, Nava Nalanda Mahavihara had been questioned by the Appellant (hereafter "the petitioner").2. The brief facts necessary to decide this appeal are that an advertisement was issued on 17th May 1999, inviting elig...
Ahmed Sayyad @ Nanhu @ Nanhe and anr. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : April 04, 2013 DECIDED ON : July 12, 2013 + CRL.A. 445/2004 AHMED SAYYAD @ NANHU @ NANHE & ANR. ..... Appellants Through : Mr.Sunil Tiwari, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Fizani Husain, APP for the State. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The appellants-Ahmed Sayyad @ Nanhu @ Nanhe (A-1) and Ameen Alou (A-2) challenge judgment dated 19.05.2004 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.50/2001 arising out of FIR No.366/2000 by which they were held guilty for committing offence punishable under Section 412 IPC. By an order on 20.05.2004, they were sentenced to undergo RI for three years with fine `1,000/- each.2. On 09.09.2000 Rama Shanker working with Aggrelliolo & Co., 11-B, Netaji Subhash Marg, Darya Ganj, Delhi took five washing machines make Videocon on the cycle rickshaw of the company for delivery to Ladi Electronics, Dakshin Puri. When he reached behind Indira Gandhi Indoor Stadi...
Mobeen Khan Vs. Obaid Khan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No. 1382 of 2012, IA No. 13479 of 2012 & IA No. 9508 of 2013 Reserved on: July 3, 2013 Decision on: July 12, 2013 MOBEEN KHAN ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. A.K. Singla, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pankaj Gupta and Mr. Deepak R. Dahiya, Advocates. versus OBAID KHAN ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Siddharth Bantha with Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Advocates for D-1. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT 12 07.2013 IA No. 13479 of 2012 (under O XII R 6 CPC) and IA No. 9508 o1. The background to these applications is that the Plaintiff filed CS (OS) No. 1382 of 2012 in this Court on 11th May 2012 for a decree of possession in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant, Mr. Obaid Khan son of late Ajaz Khan and 5 others in respect of the suit property being the front half portion of property No. 49B, Khan Market, New Delh003. (suit property), as shown in colour Red in the site plan produced with the plaint. The further relief sought was for a decree...
Seema Vs. Air Force Senior Secondary School and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No. 3764/2010 & CM 7517/2010 (stay) 12th July, 2013 % SEEMA Through: ......Petitioner Ms. Zeba Khair, Advocate VERSUS AIR FORCE SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL & ANR. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent No. 1/School. Ms. Tarannum Ralni, Advocate for Mr. Jagdeep Kumar Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition is filed by one Ms. Seema seeking appointment to the post of Physical Education Teacher with the respondent No. 1/Air Force Senior Secondary School, Palam, Delhi Cantonment, New Delhi. Respondent No. 1 is an aided school which is receiving 95% finances/aids from the Director of Education/respondent No.2.2. It is not disputed that pursuant to advertisement dated 09.01.2008, candidates including the petitioner (who received the call letter dated 19.03.2008) appeared in the interview....
Charitable Education and Welfare Society Vs. Union of India and Anothe ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:12. 07.2013 W.P.(C) 4371/2013 CHARITABLE EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv with Mr Gaurav Mitru and Mr Dhruv Kapur, Advs. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER ..... Respondents Through: Mr Rajiv Ranjan Mishra, for R-1-UOI Mr Ankit, Adv for MCI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(ORAL) Issue notice. The petitioner before this Court applied on 27.09.2012 to the respondent-Medical Council of India for grant of approval to set up a medical college. The requisite Essentiality Certificate has also been issued to the petitioner by the concerned State Government. Vide its order dated 02.03.2013, MCI pointed out the following deficiencies in the documents submitted by the petitioner:1. Year-wise Targeted Programme not disclosed.2. Authorization letter addressed to the Banker not enclosed.3. Balance sheet for the 31/03/2012 not enclosed. W.P.(C) 4371/2013 Time year Boun...
ims Engineering College Vs. All India Council for Technical Education ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on :09. 07.2013 Judgment pronounced on :12. 07.2013 WP(C) No.320/2013 IMS ENGINEERING COLLEGE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Aseem Mehrotra, Adv. versus ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION THROUGH: ITS ADVIROR-I ..... Respondent Through: Mr Amitesh Kumar, Adv. for AICTE CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN V.K. JAIN, J.1. The petitioner before this Court is a self-financing private college offering technical education and affiliated to respondent No.2 Mahamaya Technical University, Noida. For the Academic Year 2012-13, respondent No.1/All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) issued advertisement asking colleges to submit compliance report for extension of approval for the Academic Year as also for starting new courses, 2nd shift and increase of intake capacity. On 19th January, 2012, the petitioner applied to respondent No.1 for extension of approval for the existing courses in Shift No.1 and and Shift No.2, a...
Rahul Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: July 12, 2013 + W.P.(C) 6688/2012 RAHUL Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Anil Singhal, Advocate versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Anjum Javed, Advocate with Mr.Mirza Amir Baig, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. We are concerned with twelve out of twenty one posts of Sub Inspector (Ministerial) which were required to be filled up from amongst the General category departmental candidates.2. The undisputed fact is that when the select list was drawn up, in order of merit, the candidate at serial No.12 listed was the one who had obtained 152 marks and the petitioner was the senior most departmental candidate few of whom had obtained 151 marks and if there was a thirteenth vacancy available he would have been empanelled.3. The twelve empanelled candidates joined an thus the select list stood exhausted. After th...
Ex. Lance Naik Vikash Bisht Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2013
The petitioner has come up before this court against the order of dismissal passed by the Summary Court Martial dated 13.08.2011. It appears that the petitioner had filed a statutory complaint against this order before the Chief of Army Staff under section 164 (2) of the Army Act. The statutory complaint has been disposed of by the Army Chief of Staff rejecting the petition. However, the sentence of dismissal has been converted into an order of discharge. Said order has been produced by the learned counsel for the respondent today. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the petition certain facts need to be noted herein. 2. The petitioner was enrolled on 27.07.2002 as Sepoy in 64 Assault Engineer regiment, Indian Army and was posted at different places. He was attached to head quarter central command, Lucknow as draftsman. It appears that Patna Police got information that Mr. Sudhanshu Sudhakar , who had been dismissed from the Army, was proceeding to Nepal with secret info...
- ‹ Prev
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- Next ›
- Last »