Delhi Court October 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 16 of about 220 results (0.020 seconds)Pawan Mittal and ors Vs. Govt of Nct of Delhi and anr
Court: Delhi
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4756/2014 PAWAN MITTAL & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Pawan Sharma, Advocate. versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. O.P. Saxena, Additional Public Prosecutor. Ms. Gita Dhingra, Advocate with complainant in person. W/ASI Krishna, Police Station Uttam Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.A. No.16288/2014 Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application is disposed off. Crl.M.C. No.4756/2014 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No.31/2010, registered under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC at police station Uttam Nagar on 12.02.2010, on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.2. Issue notice. Mr. O.P. Saxena, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, and Ms. Gita Dhingra, Advocate for respondent No.2/ complainant, enter appearance and accept notice. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh and ors. Vs. the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: October 09, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: October 17, 2014 % + CRL.A. 18/2000 RAJESH & ORS. Represented by: ..... Appellants Ms.Rebecca M.John, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Harsh Bora, Advocate versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Varun Goswami, APP Inspector Braj Mohan, PS Farsh Bazar CRL.A. 49/2000 VIJAY JAIN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Dinesh Mathur, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Akshay Bipin, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP Inspector Braj Mohan, PS Farsh Bazar CRL.A. 27/2000 MURARI LAL & ORS Represented by: ..... Appellants Mr.K.K.Sud, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Vishal Dabas and Mr.Ajay Tushir, Advocates versus STATE Represented by: CRL.A.Nos.18/2000 & conn.matters ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP Inspector Braj Mohan, PS Farsh Bazar Page 1 of 17 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NA...
Tag this Judgment!Munshi Ram Vs. State
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. No.728 of 2008 Reserved on: October 13, 2014 Decision on: October 17, 2014 MUNSHI RAM ..... Appellant Through: Dr. Kanwal Sapra and Mr. H.R. Dhamija, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP. AND CRL.A. No.729 of 2008 ROHTASH KANWAR ..... Appellant Through: Dr. Kanwal Sapra and Mr. H.R. Dhamija, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT1710.2014 1. These two appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 7th August 2008 passed by the learned Special Judge in CC No.129 of 2006, convicting the Appellants for the offences under Sections 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) as well as the order on sentence dated 11 th August 2008, whereby for the offence under Section 7 of the PC Act each of them were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for a period of one year along with fin...
Tag this Judgment!Rohtash Kanwar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. No.728 of 2008 Reserved on: October 13, 2014 Decision on: October 17, 2014 MUNSHI RAM ..... Appellant Through: Dr. Kanwal Sapra and Mr. H.R. Dhamija, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP. AND CRL.A. No.729 of 2008 ROHTASH KANWAR ..... Appellant Through: Dr. Kanwal Sapra and Mr. H.R. Dhamija, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT1710.2014 1. These two appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 7th August 2008 passed by the learned Special Judge in CC No.129 of 2006, convicting the Appellants for the offences under Sections 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) as well as the order on sentence dated 11 th August 2008, whereby for the offence under Section 7 of the PC Act each of them were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for a period of one year along with fin...
Tag this Judgment!Vishal Raj and ors Vs. State and ors
Court: Delhi
$~22 & 24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4715/2014 RAJU & ORS Through ..... Petitioners Mr. Sanjay Dubey, Advocate. versus STATE & ANR Through ..... Respondents Mr. O.P. Saxena, Additional Public Prosecutor. Sub Inspector Sumit Kumar. AND + CRL.M.C. 4753/2014 VISHAL RAJ & ORS .... Petitioners Through Mr. Sanjay Dubey, Advocate. versus STATE & ORS Through ..... Respondent Mr. O.P. Saxena, Additional Public Prosecutor. Sub Inspector Sumit Kumar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.A. No.16045/2014 in Crl.M.C. No.4715/2014 Crl.M.A. No.16266/2014 in Crl.M.C. No.4753/2014 Exemptions, as prayed for, are allowed, subject to all just exceptions. These applications are disposed off. Crl.M.C. No.4715/2014 Crl.M.C. No.4753/2014 1. These two petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seek quashing of FIR No.736/2014 registered under Sections 308, 324, 34 IPC; and FIR No.735/2014 under Sections 308, 34 IPC, both registered at Polic...
Tag this Judgment!Rosa Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Value Added Tax, Delhi
Court: Delhi
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: October 17, 2014 + ST.APPL. 56/2014 ROSA TRADERS PVT. LTD. Through ..... Petitioner Mr.A.K.Babbar,Advocate with Mr.Surinder Kumar, Advocate versus COMMISSIONER OF VALUE ADDED TAX, DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr.Vivek Kumar Tandon, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J (ORAL) Having heard the counsel for the parties, we are inclined to frame the following substantial question of law:Whether the Appellate Tribunal, Value Added Tax was justified and right in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant Rosa Traders Pvt. Ltd. for failure to deposit the entire amount of Rs. 2 lakhs?. 2. With the consent of the parties, we take up the appeal for hearing as only a short issue arises for consideration.3. The appellant herein had preferred an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, Value Added Tax. The appeal pertained to the taxable period 1995-96. Apparently, there...
Tag this Judgment!LupIn Ltd. Vs. Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) 446/2014 LUPIN LIMITED Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Rajiv Nayyer, Sr.Advocate, Ms.Pratibha Singh, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Adhesh Nargotker, Mr.Mohit Abraham, Mr.Arvind Kr.Ray, Advocates versus SUN PHARMA LABORATORIES LIMITED & ANR Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Sudhir Chandra, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Sachin Gupta, Ms.Dipika Prasad and Ms.Yamini Pant, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA % Caveat No.918/2014 ORDER1710.2014 Counsel as above appeared for the respondent/caveator and hence the caveat is discharged CM No.17280/2014 Allowed, subject to just exceptions FAO(OS) 446/2014 1. The appellant is a defendant in the suit filed by the respondent. The FAO(OS) 446/2014 page 1 of 3 apparent grievance is to an order dated August 01, 2014 granting ad-interim injunction to the plaintiff respondent, restraining appellant from selling pharmaceutical preparations under the tra...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay JaIn Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: October 09, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: October 17, 2014 % + CRL.A. 18/2000 RAJESH & ORS. Represented by: ..... Appellants Ms.Rebecca M.John, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Harsh Bora, Advocate versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Varun Goswami, APP Inspector Braj Mohan, PS Farsh Bazar CRL.A. 49/2000 VIJAY JAIN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Dinesh Mathur, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Akshay Bipin, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP Inspector Braj Mohan, PS Farsh Bazar CRL.A. 27/2000 MURARI LAL & ORS Represented by: ..... Appellants Mr.K.K.Sud, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Vishal Dabas and Mr.Ajay Tushir, Advocates versus STATE Represented by: CRL.A.Nos.18/2000 & conn.matters ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP Inspector Braj Mohan, PS Farsh Bazar Page 1 of 17 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NA...
Tag this Judgment!Nripendra Kumar Aggarwal Vs. S.L. Aggarwal and Others
Court: Delhi
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 765/2010 & CCP(O) 69/2010, I.A. 8041/2010, I.A.10294/2011, I.A. 7158/2012, I.A. 8226/2012, I.A. 8227/2012, I.A. 13723/2012, I.A.19939/2012, I.A. 7566/2013 % Judgment dated 17.10.2014 NRIPENDRA KUMAR AGGARWAL Through: Mr. K.R. Chawla, Adv. ..... Plaintiff versus S.L. AGGARWAL & OTHERS ..... Defendant Through: Mr.Monika Arora and Mr. Abhishek Choudhary, Advs. for D-1. Ms. Jaya Tomar, Adv. for D-9 to D-13. Mr. Rajat Aneja, Ms. Aarohi Helani, Ms. Rashmi Verma and Mr. Vijay Kasana, Advs. for D-14 to D-17. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S. SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for partition of immovable property being a flat on the first floor and the second floor of property bearing No.61/30, Ram Jas Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-5 (towards House No.61/29). A preliminary decree was passed as far back as on 03.08.2011 defining the shares of the parties as 1/6th each. Thereafter initially all parties had shown...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Veena Seth Vs. Mrs. Rajshree Trivedi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:16. h October, 2014 + CS (OS) No.1804/2012 MRS. VEENA SETH Through: ..... Plaintiff Ms. Kamlesh Mahajan, Advocate Versus MRS. RAJSHREE TRIVEDI Through: ..... Defendant Mr. C.S. Rathore, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL G.P. MITTAL,J.1. This suit for possession, recovery of damages and mesne profits was initially filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendant in the District Court on 14.03.2011. The plaint was ordered to be returned to the Plaintiff as the suit was held to be within the pecuniary jurisdiction of the High Court.2. The case of the Plaintiff is that she is the absolute owner of the first floor with terrace rights in respect of property no.106, M Block, Greater Kailash, Part-1, New Delhi by virtue of a registered Gift Deed dated 24.09.2004 (Ex.PW-2/1) whereas the rear portion of the second floor of the suit property with one servant quarter on terrace and common servant toilet on terrace was sold by Late M...
Tag this Judgment!