Delhi Court December 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 108 of about 1,089 results (0.021 seconds)Mahavir Singh Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
$~10. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision:01. 12.2014 % W.P.(C.) No.5258/2013 MAHAVIR SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. C. Mohan Rao, Mr. Lokesh Kumar Sharma & Ms. Pallavi, Advocates. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY .....Respondent Through: Mr. Arun Birbal & Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioner, who was the original applicant before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT/ Tribunal) in O.A. No.1137/2011 assails the order dated 10.10.2012, whereby the said Original Application was dismissed.2. At the relevant time, the petitioner was working as an Upper Division Clerk (UDC) in the respondent Delhi Development Authority (DDA). He was issued a charge-sheet leveling the following charge:While functioning as UDC in LSB (R) in 1985 Shri Mahavir Singh handed over file No.F.4(1) 85 LSB (R) to Shri A.K. Malhotra, Stenographer, then working in Chief A...
Tag this Judgment!Arora Pharma India Pvt Ltd Vs. Govt of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
$~41 (I) THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:01. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 7263/2014 and CM No.17018/2014 ARORA PHARMA INDIA PVT LTD .... Petitioner versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS .... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr B.S. Maan and Mr Vishal Maan For the Respondents : Mr Siddharth Panda for LAC/L&B Mr Pawan Mathur for DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The counter affidavit handed over by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 (Land Acquisition Collector) is taken on record.2. By way of this writ petition the petitioner is seeking the benefit of section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioner, consequently, seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceed...
Tag this Judgment!Fazrudeen and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
$~16 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:01. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 6292/2014 & CM No.15195/2014 FAZRUDEEN & ORS. ..... Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Mr Sumit Bansal, Advocate with Mr Ateev Mathur, Ms Richa Oberoi and Ms Jagriti Ahuja, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr Abhay Prakash Sahay, CGSC with Ms Indu Prabha, Advocate for R-1 Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for R-2 Mr Dhanesh Relan and Mr Arush Bhandari, Advocates for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that this matter is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Girish Chhabra vs. Lt. Governor of Delhi and Ors.: W.P.(C) 2759/2011 decided on 12.09.2014. He states that although possession of the subject land has been taken, the award under the Land Acquisition Act,...
Tag this Judgment!Rohit Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 17, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 01, 2014 % + CRL.A. 261/2014 PRADEEP @ KULDEEP Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Sumeet Verma, Advocate with Mr.Amit Kala, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.Anil Sharma CRL.A. 116/2014 ROHIT Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Neeraj Bhardwaj, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.Anil Sharma CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARDEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PARDEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. On March 27, 2008 a joint written complaint Ex.PW-5/A was handed over by Ram Prasad PW-2, father of Rajan (hereinafter referred to as the deceased), Babloo @ Mirajuddin PW-5, the owner-cum-driver of an Innova motor vehicle bearing registration No.DL7X1951 and Hari Om Gupta PW-6, the proprietor of Himanshu Tours and Travels, informing the SHO of PS Mayur Vihar that Kuldeep and Pradeep, having mobi...
Tag this Judgment!B.R. Gupta Vs. Pawan Kumar Gupta
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:18. 03.2014 Date of Decision:01. 12.2014 + CM (M) No.415 of 2012 And CM No.6397 of 2012 B.R. GUPTA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajat Aneja, Adv. versus PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Jain, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vikram Singh & Ms. Ruchi Jain, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns an order dated 24.02.2012, whereby the Rent Control Tribunal (RCT) allowed the respondents (tenant) appeal against an order dated 24.08.2011 of the Additional Rent Controller (ARC). Consequently, the RCT set aside the order impugned before it and afforded protection to the tenant from eviction under Section 14 (2) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (Act). Background of the case 2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner (landlord) had sought eviction of the tenant from property No.47, 1st Floor, Bunglow Road, Kam...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 28, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 01, 2014 % + CRL.A.1460/2010 BABU Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms.Inderjeet Sidhu, Advocate. versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State with Inspector Keshav Kumar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Babu is convicted for the offence of murder of his wife Gunjan and directed to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of `5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year.2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the deposition of Master Pushkar, son of Babu and the deceased cannot be relied upon being tutored as his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded after three months of the incident during which period he was staying with his maternal grandparents. Even the dying declaration of ...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Thakur and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on 1st December, 2014 + W.P.(C) 8353/2014 SANJAY THAKUR & ORS. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.Aakash Kamra, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Monika Arora CGSC with Mr. Abhishek Kr. Choudhary, Adv. for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(ORAL1 Vide the instant petition, the petitioners seek quashing of the office memorandum dated 17.07.2014 and notice dated 01.08.2014. Further seek directions to clear the payable salary to the petitioners which has been wrongfully and in a malafide manner withheld by the respondent, including the arrears payable to each petitioner from October 2012-April 2013 and for the month of July, 2014.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that to this effect the petitioners have made representation to the Director, Ministry of Agricultural, however, there is no response from their end.3. Ms.Monika Arora, L...
Tag this Judgment!Mukesh Kumar Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:01. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 7324/2014 & CM No.18650/2014 MUKESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Petitioner in person. For the Respondents : Mrs Suparna Srivastava CGSC with Mr Nishtha Sikroria for R-1/UOI. Mr Rajiv Kapur and Mr Shrey Chattly for R-2. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner requires funds, urgently, to pay the initial costs for a dwelling unit as a member of a group housing society. And, although the petitioner has been saving for the past twenty two years, he has been denied access to his savings. This has led the petitioner to file the present petition. The petitioner impugns an order dated 15.10.2014 passed by Under Secretary, Ministry of Finance, rejecting his request to close his Public Provident Fund Account no.10819241976 maintained with State Bank of India (hereafter the PPF...
Tag this Judgment!Mukesh Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision : December 01, 2014 + CRL.A. 1050/2010 MUKESH KUMAR Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Bhupesh Narula, Adv. versus STATE Represented by: .... Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. Mukesh Kumar was charged and convicted for murder of Uday after an altercation took place between them on September 28, 2008 witnessed by Kuldeep Singh PW-1 the maker of the FIR.2. Kuldeep Singh in his statement to the Police stated that he was running a general merchant shop at his house. At around 9.00 PM on September 28, 2008 when he was at his shop he heard noise. He went to the place at a distance of 20 steps from his shop and saw that Mukesh and Uday Singh were quarrelling. They were got separated. At around 9.45 PM while Kuldeep Singh was at his shop and Uday Singh was sitting in front of his shop Mukesh came with a wooden danda in his hand and g...
Tag this Judgment!Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Om Kanwar
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: December 01, 2014 + W.P.(C) 759/2011 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Karunesh Tandan, Adv. Versus OM KANWAR ..... Respondent Represented by : Mr.R.R.Ahlawat, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.W.P.(C)759/2011 1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner has assailed the award dated 29.08.2009 passed by the learned Tribunal in O.P. No.219/1994, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1948 (for short ID Act), has been dismissed.2. On the basis of the pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:(i) Whether the workman has committed the misconduct as alleged in the charge sheet dated 18.01.1993 (Ex.AW1/6). (ii) Whether the Management had remitted/paid one months wages to the workman in terms of provisions of section 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act ?.3. Mr. Karunesh Tandon, learned counsel...
Tag this Judgment!