Delhi Court September 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.
Rupesh Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. No.371 of 2000 Date of Decision:25. h September, 2013 RUPESH KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ajay Verma and Mr. Udayan Tandon, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for the State. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT :SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment dated 23rd May, 2000 and order on sentence dated 25th May, 2000 in Session Case No.13/96 arising out of FIR No.126/92 under Sections 498A/304B/34 IPC registered at Police Station Seelampur, vide which the appellant was convicted for offence punishable under Sections 306 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 while co-accused Brij Devi was acquitted of the charges levelled against her. Appellant Rupesh Kumar was sentenced as under: (i) Rigorous imprisonment of five years and fine of Rs.2,000/under Section 306 IPC and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months; and (ii) Rigorous ...
Mr Lalit Kumar Modi Through His Constituted Attorn Vs. the Board of Co ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + F.A.O. No.373 of 2013 Decided on :24. h September, 2013 MR LALIT KUMAR MODI THROUGH HIS CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY SHRI MEHMOOD M ABDI .....Appellant Through: Mr.A.M.Singhvi and Parag P. Tripathi, Sr.Advs. with Mr.Ravi Sikri, Mr.S.S.Hora, Mr.Abhishek Singh, Mr.Roor Ray, Ms.Neha Bhatnagar and Mr.Gaurav Goyal, Advocates. versus THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.C.A.Sundaram, Sr.Adv. with Mr.P.R.Raman, Mrs.Akhila Premkumar, Ms.Rohini Musa, Ms.S.P.Arthi, Mr.Zafar Inayat and Mr.Govind Singh, Advs for R-1. WITH + F.A.O. No.370 of 2013 THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Mr.C.A.Sundaram, Sr.Adv. with Mr.P.R.Raman, Mrs.Akhila Premkumar, Ms.Rohini Musa, Ms.S.P.Arthi, Mr.Zafar Inayat and Mr.Govind Singh, Advocates. versus MR LALIT KUMAR MODI AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.A.M.Singhvi and Parag P.Tripathi, Sr.Advs. with Mr.Ravi Sikri, Mr.S.S.Hora, Mr.Abhishek Singh, Mr.Roor Ray, Ms.N...
Mohan Murti Vs. Deutsche Ranco Gmbh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + EFA(OS) 36/2012 and CM No.11070/2013 (stay) MOHAN MURTI Through: ..... Appellant Appellant in person with Ms. Ananya Bhattacharya, Advocate. versus DEUTSCHE RANCO GMBH ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Tasneem Ahmadi, Advocate. % Date of Decision : September 24, 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI JUDGMENT : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.1. The Appellant in this appeal seeks to challenge the order dated 4.7.2012 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Execution Petition whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the application being E.A. No.356/2006 of the Respondent/Decree Holder under Order XXII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure to bring on record Invensys Deutschland GmbH in place of the original Decree Holder Deutsche Ranco GmbH, and also allowed the application for restoration of the Execution Petition which was dismissed in default on 7.8.2007, being E.A. No.36/2008.2. Shorn of details, the fac...
Lalita Awasthi Vs. Vidya Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: September 24, 2013 + CM(M) No.577/2012 LALITA AWASTHI Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Santosh Kumar, Adv. with Mr.Madhurendra Sharma, Adv. versus VIDYA DEVI & ORS Through ..... Respondents Ms.Anjali Chopra, Adv. for R-1. Mr.Desh Deepak Tyagi, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 28 th March, 2012 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for treating the suit, being Suit No.29/2011 in continuation of the old suit and hearing the said suit from the stage of final arguments and adjudicate upon the remaining issues framed in Suit No.770/2007 was dismissed.2. The petitioner filed a suit for recovery of possession as well as injunction against the respondents/defendants (Suit No.770/1993). Circumstances that led to the suit are as follows: i. That petitioner is the owner of property MIG DDA Flat bearing No.3, Pkt D Phase II, Mayur Vihar, D...
State Vs. Pawan Kumar @ Raja Chand
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment:24.09.2013 CRL.L.P. 585/2012 & Crl. M.A. No.19950/2012 STATE ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Saleem Ahmed, ASC for the State. versus PAWAN KUMAR @ RAJA CHAND ..... Respondent Through None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) 1 State is aggrieved by the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge dated 03.05.2012 whereby the respondent/Pawan Kumar had been acquitted of the charges leveled against him i.e. of charges under Sections 363/377/302 of the IPC. The finding returned was that the prosecution has failed to prove its case. 2 The case of the prosecution is that on 14.04.2009, an information was received in the local police station Kirti Nagar that Bunty aged 5 five years had been kidnapped; efforts to trace out him having failed, an FIR under Section 363 was registered. Two days later i.e. on 16.04.2009, DD No.11-A was recorded (Ex.PW-5/A) which contained inf...
The Board of Control for Cricket in India Vs. Mr Lalit Kumar Modi and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + F.A.O. No.373 of 2013 Decided on :24. h September, 2013 MR LALIT KUMAR MODI THROUGH HIS CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY SHRI MEHMOOD M ABDI .....Appellant Through: Mr.A.M.Singhvi and Parag P. Tripathi, Sr.Advs. with Mr.Ravi Sikri, Mr.S.S.Hora, Mr.Abhishek Singh, Mr.Roor Ray, Ms.Neha Bhatnagar and Mr.Gaurav Goyal, Advocates. versus THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.C.A.Sundaram, Sr.Adv. with Mr.P.R.Raman, Mrs.Akhila Premkumar, Ms.Rohini Musa, Ms.S.P.Arthi, Mr.Zafar Inayat and Mr.Govind Singh, Advs for R-1. WITH + F.A.O. No.370 of 2013 THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Mr.C.A.Sundaram, Sr.Adv. with Mr.P.R.Raman, Mrs.Akhila Premkumar, Ms.Rohini Musa, Ms.S.P.Arthi, Mr.Zafar Inayat and Mr.Govind Singh, Advocates. versus MR LALIT KUMAR MODI AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.A.M.Singhvi and Parag P.Tripathi, Sr.Advs. with Mr.Ravi Sikri, Mr.S.S.Hora, Mr.Abhishek Singh, Mr.Roor Ray, Ms.N...
Sanyogta Prakash Vs. Bibi Dhira Bala and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.699/2013 Judgment reserved on:14. h August, 2013 Judgment delivered on:24. h September, 2013 % SANYOGTA PRAKASH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sandeep Bhalla, Mr. Aviral Asthana and Mr. Alok Singh, Advocates. Versus BIBI DHIRA BALA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Pinky Anand, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sangeeta Bharti, Mr. Nitin Soni and Ms. Natasha Sherawat, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.CM(M) No.699/2013 1. Vide the present petition, petitioner has assailed the order dated 20.04.2013 passed by the learned ARC, whereby an application filed by the petitioner under Order I Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was dismissed.2. It is important to note that the landlady/respondent No.1 has filed an eviction petition under Section 14 (1) (e) read with Section 25(B) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter to be referred as DRC Act) against the respondent No.2/husb...
Krishna Bhandari and ors. Vs. Shanti Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: September 24, 2013 + RC.REV. 342/2012 & C.M. No.12657/2012 KRISHNA BHANDARI & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr.Manbir Singh, Adv. versus SHANTI DEVI & ORS Through ..... Respondents Ms.Ruchira V.Arora, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The present revision petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 25B (8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the order dated 17th February, 2012 passed by the ARC, (Central), Delhi whereby the leave to defend application of the petitioners was dismissed in an eviction petition filed by the respondents against the petitioners on the grounds of bonafide requirement in respect of a corner room in the property No.1000, Shivaji Street, Arya Samaj Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the tenanted premises) 2. The brief fact matrix of the case is that the above said property was initially owned...
Satya NaraIn Bansal Vs. Dda
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA(OS) 23/1997 SATYA NARAIN BANSAL Through: .....Appellant Mr.A.K.Singla, Senior Advocate with Mr.Sushil Jaiswal and Mr.Sheetesh Khanna, Advocates. versus DDA Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Pawan Mathur, Advocate. Date of Decision :24th September, 2013 % CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRATIBHA RANI, J 1. Late Sh.Satya Narain Bansal filed CS(OS) No.1841/1985 against DDA seeking a decree for specific performance to execute the necessary perpetual lease deed in favour of the appellant in respect of Plot No.216, Block No.B-4, Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi, measuring 200 sq.yds. approximately.2. Vide impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge, on finding that the Appellant (Plaintiff in the Civil Suit) failed to prove that he was ready and willing to perform his part of the obligation, dismissed the suit.3. The facts, as pleaded in the Civil Suit, reveal that Sh.Satya Narain Bansal, in his capa...
Brijesh Kumar Gupta Vs. the State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :9. h JULY, 2013 DECIDED ON :24. h SEPTEMBER, 2013 + CRL.M.C. 1496/2013 & CRL.M.A. 4708/2013 (Stay) BRIJESH KUMAR GUPTA Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.D.C.Mathur, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Shukhvinder Singh & Mr.Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Advocates. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. Mr.Maninder Jeet Singh, Advocate for Respondent No.2. SI Amit Rathel, PS Model Town. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Brijesh Kumar Gupta (the petitioner) seeks quashing of FIR No.355/2011 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Model Town, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No.2 Shikha Gupta. She has contested the petition.2. I have heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the respondent No.2 and have examined the record. The petitioner was married to respondent No.2 on 29.10.2009 and after marriage, they lived together at matrimonial home, FU-40, P...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »