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.
B.S. Ahluwalia and ors. Vs. D.D.A. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4867-70/2004 B.S. AHLUWALIA & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Sanjay Jain, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Shailender Singh and Ms. Namisha Gupta, Advocates. versus D.D.A. & ORS. Through: % ..... Respondents Ms. Anita Pandey, Advocate for the DDA. Date of Decision : July 08, 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL JUDGMENT : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.1. The present petition seeks to assail letter dated 24.3.2004 issued by the Respondent No.1/DDA whereby the lease of the plot at A-1/166, Pankha Road, Janak Puri, New Delhi has been cancelled and determined by the Respondent No.1 and letter dated 30.7.2003 rejecting the application filed by the Petitioners for conversion of leasehold rights in the aforesaid property into freehold on the ground of non-payment of the misuse charges of ` 75,10,178/-.2. The background facts necessary for the decision of the present writ petition are that on 27.3.1974 vide a perpetual lease executed by the President...
State Vs. Aamir Khan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2013
$~01. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 126/2013 % Judgment dated 08.07.2013 STATE Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. along with SI Bharat Singh, P.S. Gandhi Nagar, Delhi. versus AAMIR KHAN ..... Respondent Through CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL G.S. SISTANI, J (ORAL) CRL.M.A.NO.3049/2013.1. This is an application filed by the petitioner/State seeking condonation of delay in filing the present leave to appeal.2. Heard. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in filing the present leave to appeal is condoned.3. Application stands disposed of. CRL.L.P. 126/2013 4. By the present Criminal Leave Petition, filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 25.1.2012, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge in Session Case No.35/2009, on the ground that the impugned judgment dated 25.1.2012 is contrary to the law and facts...
Govt. of Nct of Delhi Thru Chief Secretary and ors. Vs. Sh.Vikas
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: July 08, 2013 + W.P.(C) 4168/2012 GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI THRU CHIEF SECRETARY & ORS. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Ms.Ruchi Sindhwani, Advocate with Ms.Megha and Ms.Bandana Shukla, Advocates versus SH.VIKAS Represented by: ..... Respondent Ms.Manpreet Kaur, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. It is not in dispute that pursuant to the direction issued by the Tribunal on September 01, 2010 deciding OA No.2067/2010 a speaking order dated October 18, 2010 has been passed on the subject of respondents entitlement to be granted appointment on compassionate grounds due to his father dying in harness on March 01, 2005.2. The speaking order takes note of the fact that on the death of the deceased the family received a sum of `10,37,548/- as death-cumterminal benefits and a family pension of `4,200/- + dearness allowance was sanctioned.3. We note th...
Uoi and ors. Vs. Jatadhar Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: July 03, 2013 Judgment Pronounced on: July 08, 2013 + W.P.(C) No.692/2012 UOI & ORS. Represented by: .....Petitioners Mr.Sumeet Pushkarna, Advocate versus JATADHAR SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Ankur Chhibber, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Vide order dated November 01, 2010, OA No.1129/2010 filed by the respondents was allowed holding that work performed by the respondents was in the skilled category and not semi-skilled category and thus they would be entitled to wages applicable to skilled workman and consequently benefit of first financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme to which they would be entitled to would be in the pay scale `4000-6000 and the second financial upgradation benefit would be in the pay scale `5000-8000. The Tribunal held that the second financial upgradation would be upon rendering 20 years servic...
Manoj Kumar Vs. State (Nct) of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + (1) CRL.A. 217/2010 MANOJ KUMAR Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Vivek Sood, Advocate. versus STATE (NCT) OF DELHI Through: + (2) ..... Respondent Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP. CRL.A. 297/2010 ARVIND YADAV Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Vivek Sood, Advocate. versus STATE Through: + (3) ..... Respondent Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP. CRL.A. 525/2010 RANJIT ..... Appellant Through: None. versus STATE (NCT) OF DELHI Through: % ..... Respondent Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP. Date of Decision : July 08, 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.1. Challenge in the present appeals is to the judgment dated 22.8.2009 convicting the Appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and the order dated 31.8.2009 sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of ` 2,000/- each, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of o...
Nasreen Simon Vs. Ghulam Rasool Simon
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON:08. h July, 2013 FAO(OS) 231/2013 NASREEN SIMON ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Priyanka Kathuria for Mr. Mohit Goel, Advocate. versus GHULAM RASOOL SIMON ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Akash Bhalla, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI % MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) 1. Mr. Akash Bhalla, Advocate for respondent sought time stating that main counsel instructed him to appear in the matter, who is not available though he was present during the first call. On the other hand, proxy counsel for appellant Ms. Priyanka Kathuria stated that counsel for the appellant Mr. Mohit Goel is not available.2. The Court had issued emergent notice having regard to the nature of the impugned order and it is pursuant to the notice that the respondent is represented.3. The present appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 20.2.2012 whereby the respondent/defendants ri...
Parshottam Parkash and anr Vs. Swati Bharara and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:8. h July, 2013 % + CS(OS) 2731/2011, I.A. No.2634/2012 (u/S 8 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act), I.A. No.5675/2012 (u/O 1.R-12&14 CPC) & I.A. No.17516/2011 (u/O 3.R-1& 2 CPC) PARSHOTTAM PARKASH & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Jos Chiramel, Adv. Versus SWATI BHARARA & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Ms. Amrit Kaur Oberai, Ms. Jesica Gill and Ms. Neha Mishra, Advocates for D-1. Mr. Vivek Ojha, Adv. for Mr. Prakash Gautam, Adv. for D-2&3. D-4 in person. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.Though hearing on 9th May, 2013 was commenced on IA No.2634/2012 of the defendant no.1 under Section 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 but during the course of hearing a doubt was raised as to the very maintainability of the suit and arguments on that aspect also were heard and orders reserved.2. The two plaintiffs i.e. Shri Parshottam Parkash and his wife Smt. Sita Devi have instituted this suit fo...
Musa Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. No. 1053/2010 MUSA SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr. S.K. Sethi, Advocate. Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP. versus STATE % Date of Decision : July 08, 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.1. Challenge in the present appeal is to the sentence of life imprisonment for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 377 IPC, the sentence of 5 years rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 363 IPC and 3 years rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 411 IPC and varying amounts of fine for the aforesaid offences, in default the Appellant to undergo further imprisonment.2. The prosecution case in a nutshell is that on 19.04.2006, the Appellant/accused Musa Singh abducted and sodomised a boy named Vishal aged 5-6 years and caused his death by hitting him with a brick on his head. PW1 Seema in this regard lodged a c...
Union of India and ors. Vs. Nau Nihal Singh Rana
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: July 05, 2013 + W.P.(C) 4153/2013 UNION OF INDIA & ORS Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.J.K.Singh, Advocate versus NAU NIHAL SINGH RANA ..... Respondent Represented by: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) CM No.9738/2013 Allowed subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) No.4153/2013 1. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.2. Our reason for so doing.3. The undisputed position is that having superannuated from service after serving Indian Railways the respondent suddenly suffered a complete loss of vision in his left eye and was diagnosed as a case of Retina detachment. It required immediate emergent operation. In a state of emergency the respondent went to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital which is not on the panel of Hospitals notified by the Northern Railway and on January 17, 2011 underwent s...
QayamuddIn and ors Vs. Jamil-ud-dIn and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:8. h July, 2013 % + RFA 309/1997 QAYAMUDDIN & ORS Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Nikhil Chhoker for Mr. Qayamuddin, Adv. versus JAMIL-UD-DIN & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Amita Gupta, Adv. for R-7. Mr. Ashok Mahipal, Adv. for R-8. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.Mr. Nikhil Chhoker proxy counsel for Mr. Qayamuddin stated to be Advocate for the appellant no.2 appears and seeks adjournment. None appears for the appellant no.1 and appellant no.3.2. This being an appeal of the year 1997 and there being no cause disclosed for the adjournment sought, the same has been refused. A perusal of the order sheet also shows that adjournments were sought by Mr. Nikhil Chhoker, Advocate on 25th February, 2013 and 15th April, 2013. There is no reason to keep this appeal pending specially when the appellants themselves do not appear to be interested in pursuing the same.3. The counsel for the respondent n...
- ‹ Prev
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- Next ›
- Last »