Delhi Court January 2014 Judgments
North Delhi Power Limited Vs. Rajesh Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-06-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 22 of 2008 NORTH DELHI POWER LIMITED ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Vikram Nandarajog & Mr. Sushil Jaswal, Advocates versus RAJESH GUPTA ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER0601.2014 1. This is an appeal filed by the North Delhi Power Limited (NDPL) against the impugned judgment dated 3rd December 2008 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge [Electricity]. (ASJ) in Special Case No.6 of 2007 arising out of First Information Report (FIR) No.371 of 2006, Police Station (PS) Model Town, New Delhi.2. By the impugned order, the learned ASJ found the Respondent guilty of the offence of commission of theft of electricity under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (Act). Since the accused had not deposited the billed amount voluntarily, the Court proceeded to determine the civil liability under Section 154 (5) of the Act. The Court noted that the onus to prove that the accused committed the theft of electricity for ...
Tag this Judgment!A.Nagrajan Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-06-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :7. h NOVEMBER, 2013 DECIDED ON :6. h JANUARY, 2014 + CRL.A. 478/2000 A.NAGRAJAN ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Tom Joseph, Advocate. VERSUS STATE Through : ..... Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. A.Nagrajan (the appellant) questions the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 02.08.2000 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.569/96 arising out of FIR No.232/88 PS Saraswati Vihar by which he was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 498A/306 IPC. By an order dated 03.08.2000, he was awarded RI for three years with fine ` 5,000/under Section 306 IPC and RI for one and a half years with fine `1,000/- under Section 498A IPC. The brief facts which are relevant to dispose of this appeal are recapitulated as under :2. Meena was married to the appellant (A. Nagrajan) and a male child was born to her out of this wedlock. Her parents had given various ar...
Tag this Judgment!imarti Devi and ors. Vs. Paras Ram and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-06-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: January 06, 2014 + CM(M) No.397/2012 IMARTI DEVI & ORS Through ..... Petitioners Ms.Geetanjali Mohan, Adv. with Ms.Mansi Gautam, Adv. versus PARAS RAM & ANR Through ..... Respondents Mr.Surinder Jain, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 6th February, 2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge (West) III, Delhi in Suit No.345/2011 whereby the application of the petitioners (legal representatives of the deceased defendant/Judgment-debtor Om Prakash) under Section 151 CPC was disposed of which was filed by the petitioners for disposal of the pending application under Sections 144 & 151 CPC which was not decided rather the matter was fixed for evidence.2. The facts of the matter are that the respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit against the original defendant Om Prakash for possession in regard to a part of the premises bearing No.B-1/2, Sidharth Bas...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmed Sayeed Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-06-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :6. h November, 2013 DECIDED ON :6. h January, 2014 + CRL.A. 738/2000 AHMED SAYEED ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Arun Sharma with Mr.Saleem Malik, Advocates. VERSUS STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Ahmed Sayeed (the appellant) impugns a judgment dated 07.06.2000 of Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.15/98 arising out of FIR No.311/98 registered at Police Station Rajouri Garden whereby he was held guilty for committing offences under Section 498A/304B IPC. By an order dated 9th June, 2000, he was awarded rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 304-B IPC and rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine `500/- under Section 498A IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.2. Allegations against the appellant were that he used to harass Ishrat, his legally wedded wife, for or in connection with dowry demands during her stay at the matrimo...
Tag this Judgment!Yuvraj Singh Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-06-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + I.A. No.17982/2011 (O.XXXVII R.3 (5) CPC) in CS (OS) No.1142/2011 Reserved on:19. h November, 2013 Decided on:6. h January, 2014 % YUVRAJ SINGH Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. S.K. Jain, Advocate. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Through: ..... Defendant Mr. M.K. Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 By this application the Defendant seeks leave to defend the suit.2. Learned counsel for the Defendant contends that the present suit for recovery does not fall within the scope and ambit of Order XXXVII CPC. No cause of action ever accrued in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant. The Defendant constituted a Committee to look into the matter relating to bills of the Plaintiff which found certain lapses and thus a Vigilance Inquiry has been ordered into the same. The entire records relating to the concerned Division Office and the works in dispute are in the custody of the Vigilance Branch. It is the case of the Defen...
Tag this Judgment!Prit Pal Singh Vs. Ramesh Kumar Dora
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-06-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment pronounced on: January 06, 2014 RC. Rev. No.444/2012 & C.M. No.15214/2012 PRIT PAL SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Sidharth Joshi, Adv. versus RAMESH KUMAR DORA Through ..... Respondent Mr.Dinesh Agnani, Sr.Adv. with Ms.Leena Tuteja, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioner (respondent in the eviction petition) has filed the abovementioned revision petition under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 assailing the order dated 3rd March, 2012 passed by the learned Addl. Rent Controller-01 (East), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby the petitioners application for leave to defend has been dismissed and the eviction order has been passed against the petitioner.2. Admittedly, the respondent/landlord has filed the eviction petition against the petitioner/tenant in respect of the tenanted premises, i.e. Shop No.4 situated on the ground floor of the property bearing No.IX/1632, near ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Basanti Devi Vs. Smt. Chandrawati
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-06-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: January 06, 2014 + CM(M) No.908/2013 SMT BASANTI DEVI Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Sumeet Verma, Adv. with Ms.Charu Verma, Adv. versus SMT CHANDRAWATI Through ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 15th May, 2013 whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 151 CPC directing the respondent to accept the payment as per the settlement has been dismissed.2. Brief facts of the matter are that the petitioner who is the plaintiff in the learned trial Court is a widow aged above 75 years. She is the owner of the property bearing No.16/992, Bapa Nagar, Pyare Lal Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi which was purchased by her from one Sh.Om Dutt.3. In April, 1985, the petitioner was in need of some money and she borrowed a sum of `22,000/- from the respondent, on the condition that the respondent would be given th...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Urmil Kapur and ors. Vs. Anand Swarup Mehta and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-06-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: January 06, 2014 + RC. Rev. No.411/2013 & C.M. No.17687/2013 MRS URMIL KAPUR & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr.N.P.Singh, Adv. versus ANAND SWARUP MEHTA & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr.Harish Malhotra, Sr.Adv. with Ms.Divvya Kesaar & Mr.Mannmohit K.Puri, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The present revision petition has been filed under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to set aside the eviction order (hereinafter referred to as the impugned order) dated 6th May, 2013 and against the dismissal of the application for the review of eviction order dated 6th May, 2013 under Section 25B(9) of the Act vide order dated 15th October, 2013.2. The brief facts are that late Sh.P.P. Kapur was inducted as tenant on 9th February, 1976 by the erstwhile owner of the property Smt.Chander Kanta Jawa on lease.3. On 15th February, 1995, the respo...
Tag this Judgment!Akhil Aggarwal Vs. State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-06-2014
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:6. h January, 2014 BAIL APPLN. 656/2013 AKHIL AGGARWAL Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Rebecca John, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vivek Kohli, Mr. Lokesh Bhola and Ms. Mansha Anand, Advocates versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through: + BAIL APPLN. 657/2013 SACHIN TANDON Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Fizani Hussain , APP for the State Mr. D.S. Kohli, Advocate for the complainant Insp. Ashu Girotra, EOW ..... Petitioner Ms. Rebecca John, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vivek Kohli, Mr. Lokesh Bhola and Ms. Mansha Anand, Advocates versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Fizani Hussain , APP for the State. Mr. D.S. Kohli, Advocate for the complainant Insp. Ashu Girotra, EOW CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Vide this common order, I shall dispose of two bail applications bearing No.656/2013 and 657/2013 moved by Sh. Akhil Aggaral and Mr. Sachin Tandon as both the applicants are arrayed as accused in c...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Vijay Kumar Vs. Munna (Pahlwan) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-06-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.1/2014 & CM Nos.6/2014 & 7/2014 6th January, 2014 % SH. VIJAY KUMAR Through: ......Appellant Mr. R.S.Bhatia, Advocate. VERSUS MUNNA (PAHLWAN) & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The costs imposed on 3.1.2014 are waived. Let the appeal be argued.2. This first appeal under Section 43 (i) (r) of CPC impugns the order of the trial court dated 25.11.2013 by which the appellant/plaintiffs application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 was dismissed.3. Appellant/plaintiff has filed the subject suit for injunction claiming ownership of the subject property being plot no.66, admeasuring 111 sq. yds., Rect. No.11, Out of K.No.10/2, Revenue Estate of Village Burari, Delhi. As per the plaint, the case of the appellant-plaintiff was that in January, 2012, plaintiff had mortgaged the said property with the respondent no.1 for a sum of Rs.4.50 lacs...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- Next ›
- Last »