Delhi Court December 2014 Judgments
Shanti and Ors Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. No.270 of 2010 SHANTI & ORS ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Puneet Mittal and Mr. A.N. Aggarwal, Advocates. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP for the State. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar & Mr. Ram Kamal Prasad, Advocates for Complainant. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER1812.2014 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 6th February 2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.24 of 2008, convicting the appellants for the offences under Sections 452 IPC and 308/34 of IPC and the order on sentence dated 11th February 2010 sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for a period of two years with a fine of Rs.2,000 each and in default, simple imprisonment (SI) for six months for the offence under Section 452 IPC and RI for a period of 2 years with fine of Rs.1,000 each and in default to undergo SI for three months for the offence under Section 308/34 of IP...
Tag this Judgment!S. Thakran Vs. Indraprastha Power Generation Co. Ltd and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5986/2013 Decided on:18. 12.2014 IN THE MATTER OF: S. THAKRAN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Vimal Wadhawan, Advocate versus INDRAPRASTHA POWER GENERATION CO. LTD AND ANR... Respondents Through: Mr.R.K.Vats, Advocate for R-1/IPGCL Mr. Sumit Chander, Advocate for Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, Advocate for R-2. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner, who was working on the post of PRO with the respondent No.1/IPGCL, has filed the present petition praying inter alia for quashing of the suspension order dated 21.11.2012 and the order dated 26.02.2013 issued by the respondent No.1/IPGCL, whereunder he was informed that pending the departmental inquiry against him, it was decided to release only the provisional pension in his favour. The second relief sought by the petitioner is for issuing directions to the respondents to pay release his retirement benefits of pension, GPF, gratuity, leave encashment, commutation...
Tag this Judgment!Sunder Sharma and Ors Vs. The State and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4636/2014 SUNDER SHARMA & ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Ramesh Sethi, Advocate with petitioners in person. versus THE STATE & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Nishi Jain, APP for the State with SI Rajvir Singh, PS CWC Nanakpura. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate for R2 with R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. 15804/2014 (for exemption) Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed off. CRL.M.C. 4636/2014 1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.34/2013 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at Police Station Crime (Women Cell), Nanakpura on 5th March, 2013 on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.2. Issue notice. Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor and Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate enter appearance and accept notic...
Tag this Judgment!Ifci Factors Ltd. Vs. State of Nct of Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:5. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:18. h December, 2014 % + CRL. M.C. 4184/2014 IFCI FACTORS LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Deepak Bashta, Advocate. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Karan Singh, APP for the State. Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adovcate for R-2 to R-4. + CRL. M.C. 4775/2014 IFCI FACTORS LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Deepak Bashta, Advocate. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Karan Singh, APP for the State. Mr. Prshant Manchanda, Adovcate for R-2 to R-6. + CRL. M.C. 4776/2014 IFCI FACTORS LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Deepak Bashta, Advocate. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. Crl. M.C. No.4184/2014 & connected matters Through: + Mr. Karan Singh, APP for the State. Mr. Prshant Manchanda, Adovcate for R-2 to R-6. CRL. M.C. 4795/2014 IFCI FACTORS LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Deepak Bashta, Advocate. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Resp...
Tag this Judgment!Ramona Jind Vs. Sohnu Mohan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Cont. Cas (C) No.170/2014 Decided on:18. h December, 2014 RAMONA JIND ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Saurabh Chauhan & Mr. Varun Jain, Advocates with petitioner in person. versus SOHNU MOHAN Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Prag Chawla & Mr. Abhey Narula, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present contempt petition is premised on the fact that the respondent has wilfully breached his undertaking purported to have been given to the court on 25.7.2013.2. The petitioner and the respondent apparently seem to be having a matrimonial dispute which resulted in filing of Crl. M. (C) No.3731/2012. The parties have two children from the wedlock, who are informed to be US citizens. The petitioner is also a US citizen but presently she is in India and the respondent also happens to be a US citizen, stationed in America.3. During the pendency of the aforesaid petition, on 25.7.2013, the learned senior counsel appearing for t...
Tag this Judgment!Mount Carmel School Society Vs. Delhi Development Authority and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) No.1687/2014 Decided on :18. h December, 2014 MOUNT CARMEL SCHOOL SOCIETY Petitioner Through: Dr. Jose Verghese, Mr. Jawahar Singh & Ms. Priya Singh, Advocates. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR. Respondents Through: Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Adv. for DDA. Ms. Zubeda Begum, SC for R-2 & 3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) C.M. No.17983/2014 1. This is an application for staying the construction raised by respondent Nos.2 and 3 in respect of plot of land in question, which is purported to have been allotted to the petitioner. Alternatively, the petitioner has prayed for grant of an order of status quo.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.3. The case of the petitioner is that it has been allotted only two acres of land while as its case was recommended in the year 1996 for four acres of land. It is contended by Mr. Jose, the learned counsel for the p...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Chand Sharma Vs. The Director of Education and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2423/2014 Decided on:18. 12.2014 IN THE MATTER OF: SURESH CHAND SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. K.P. Gupta, Advocate versus THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & ORS ..... Respondents Through : Ms. Nidhi Raman, Advocate for R-1 to R-3/DOE with Mr. R.K. Gupta, DOE. Ms. Pushti Gupta, Adv. for R-4 and R-5/School. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for issuance of directions to the respondents No.1 to 3 /Directorate of Education (DOE) and the respondents No.4 & 5/School for releasing his salaries for the period w.e.f. 1.7.2013 to 05.12.2013, alongwith interest. Further, the petitioner seeks directions to the respondent No.2 to modify the re-employment order dated 06.12.2013, to make it effective from 1.7.2013 instead of 06.12.2013.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was working on the post of Vice-Principal in the respondent No....
Tag this Judgment!Sushma Berlia and Ors. Vs. Kamal Kumar and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :3. d DECEMBER, 2014 DECIDED ON :18. h DECEMBER, 2014 + CS (OS) 1097/2009 SUSHMA BERLIA & ORS. Through : ..... Plaintiffs Mr.Amarjit Singh, Advocate with Ms.Vernika Tomar, Advocate. VERSUS KAMAL KUMAR & ORS. Through : ..... Defendants None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The plaintiffs have instituted the instant suit for permanent injunction against the defendants restraining infringement of trademark, passing off and damages, etc.2. As per the averments in the plaint, plaintiffs No.1 and 2 are the joint proprietors and owners of all intellectual property rights in the mark APEEJAY. The plaintiff No.3, and other business concerns managed and controlled by plaintiffs No.1 & 2 are using intellectual property assets of plaintiffs No.1 & 2 as licencee / permitted users. Para No.7 describes name of the schools and educational institutions managed, administered and run by plaintiff No.3 society. It is averred that the...
Tag this Judgment!Vinod Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :11. 12.2014 Pronounced on :18.12.2014 % + CRL.A. 1380/2014 VINOD KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr.A.Chaubey and Mr.A.K.Mishra, Advs. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRATIBHA RANI, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the Appellant Vinod Kumar impugning his conviction under Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 read with Section 354/341 IPC vide judgment dated 16.07.2014 as well as sentence awarded to him vide order dated 22.07.2014.2. The Appellant has been sentenced to undergo RI for five years with fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for 15 days for committing the offence punishable under Section 10 of POCSO Act. However, no separate sentence was awarded for the offence punishable under Sections 354/341 IPC.3. I have heard Mr.A.K.Chaubey, Advocate for the Appellant and Ms.Rajdipa Beh...
Tag this Judgment!Gnct of Delhi and Ors Vs. Arun Rawat and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-18-2014
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:18. 12.2014 + W.P. (C) 2208/2011 GNCT OF DELHI AND ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Ms.Latika Chaudhry, Adv. versus ARUN RAWAT & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Ms.Jyoti Singh, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Sameer Sharma and Ms.Tinu Bajwa, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The narrow question which the petitioner i.e., the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSB) urges, in these proceedings challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench in OA No.3193/09, is whether the respondent-applicant was eligible to apply and secure appointment as Junior Engineer (Civil). It is urged by DSSB that the applicant had exceeded the age limits prescribed.2. Briefly the facts are that the applicant was selected as an LDC through the Staff Selection Commission in the Employees Provident Fund Organisation, which he joined on 09.06....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »