Delhi Court December 2014 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.
Jai Prakash Sharma Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:15. h October, 2014 Date of Decision:15th December, 2014 % + CRL. M.C. 86/2013 JAI PRAKASH SHARMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sunil K. Mittal, Advocate. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. M.P. Singh, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH JUDGMENT1 By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), the petitioner Mr. Jai Prakash Sharma has assailed the order dated 06.11.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-III (East), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby revision petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed.2. Succinctly stating the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner filed a complaint against Manoj Pant, SHO P.S. Preet Vihar, ASI Rajbir Singh, Constable Umed Singh and Constable Sorveer Singh for the offence under Sections 341/342/379/365/506/ 323/463/469/471/34 IPC on the allegations, in...
Delhi Development Authority Vs. H L Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~13. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:15. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 3618/2014 and C.M. No.7369/2014 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Arun Birbal & Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocates. versus H L SHARMA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Apurb Lal & Mr. Daleep singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioner, Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 11.10.2013 in T.A. No.11/2011, whereby the applicant/respondents dismissal from the post of Junior Engineer was quashed and he was directed to be reinstated with 50% arrears of salary and emoluments from the date of dismissal, i.e. 16.04.1985.2. Briefly, the facts are that the applicant was, at the relevant time, holding the post and discharging the functions of Junior Engineer in t...
Pankaj Kapur Vs. Govt of Nct of Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:15. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 7696/2014 .... Petitioner PANKAJ KAPUR versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr B.S.Maan, Mr Vishal Maan and Mr Aditya Singh, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr Arjun Pant for DDA. Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi for R-4 & R-5. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The counter affidavit on behalf of respondent No.2 has been handed over by Mr Yeeshu Jain. The same is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file the rejoinder affidavit and would be relying on the averments made in the writ petition.2. The petitioner seeks 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 int...
Krishan Kumar Huf Vs. Govt of Nct of Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:15. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 7753/2014 .... Petitioner KRISHAN KUMAR HUF 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 Respondent/DDA : Mr Arjun Pant, Advocate for DDA. For the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Mr Siddhartha Panda. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks 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. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding, which is the subject matter of the present writ petition, ought to be deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. The Award under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (her...
Sunil Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: December 15, 2015 + CRL.A. 1318/2014 SUNIL Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP Insp.Sanjeev, PS Shahbad Dairy CRL.A. 1271/2014 JAI KISHORE @ SHERU Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Sunil Dahiya, Advocate versus THE STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, Advocate Insp.Sanjeev, PS Shahbad Dairy CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Believing the testimony of Sushila PW-1, her son Tinku PW-2 and her neighbour Rekha PW-4, vide impugned decision dated April 24, 2014 the learned Trial Judge has held that the prosecution has successfully proved the fact that appellants Jai Kishore @ Sheru and Sunil along with two absconding co-accused named Raju and Munna, in furtherance of their common intention, using the handle Ex.P-1 of a hand-pump and a wooden stick ...
Apex Traders Vs. Satnam Sales Corporation and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 2425/2010 Decided on:15. h December, 2014 % APEX TRADERS Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Abhinash Kr. Mishra, Mr. S.S. Mishra, Advs. versus SATNAM SALES CORPORATION & ORS ..... Respondent Through Mohd. Zahid, Adv. for R-2&3. Mr.Yogesh Verma, APP for State. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner filed a complaint before the learned ACMM impleading the respondents No.1 to 4 as accused. The complainant alleged that in the month of June/July 2007 since he was in need of scrap he checked certain websites including Alibaba.com. There he came across the number of respondent No.4 Abhinav Goel who introduced the petitioner with respondents No.1 to 3 and that they were dealers in ferrous and non-ferrous scrap metals. Respondent No.2&3 representing to be partners of respondent No.1 agreed to supply H.R./C.R. cutting 250.m.t. @ `18,700/- m.t. in a lot of 100 m.t. The delivery of the aforesaid items were agree...
Delhi Development Authority Vs. H L Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~13. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:15. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 3618/2014 and C.M. No.7369/2014 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Arun Birbal & Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocates. versus H L SHARMA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Apurb Lal & Mr. Daleep singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioner, Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 11.10.2013 in T.A. No.11/2011, whereby the applicant/respondents dismissal from the post of Junior Engineer was quashed and he was directed to be reinstated with 50% arrears of salary and emoluments from the date of dismissal, i.e. 16.04.1985.2. Briefly, the facts are that the applicant was, at the relevant time, holding the post and discharging the functions of Junior Engineer in t...
Vinod Kumar Bakshi Vs. Rajan Kapoor and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : December 15, 2014 + FAO(OS) 140/2014 VINOD KUMAR BAKSHI Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Rajesh Gogna, Advocate versus RAJAN KAPOOR & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Vikas Dhawan, Advocate with Mr.S.Panda, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Vide order dated November 26, 2013 various applications have been decided by the learned Single Judge, two of which are IA No.853/2013 and IA No.11351/2013. Whereas IA No.853/2013 was filed by plaintiff No.1, IA No.11351/2013 jointly by plaintiff No.2 and defendants No.1 and 3. The former application was filed under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the latter was filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. IA No.853/2013 has been allowed. Decree on admission has been passed in favour of plaintiff No.1. IA No.11351/2013 has been dismissed.2. Laying a challenge ...
Yogendra Kumar Modi Vs. M.K. Modi and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order delivered on:15. h December, 2014 % + CS(OS) No.1585/2008 YOGENDRA KUMAR MODI ..... Plaintiff Through Mr.Darpan Wadhwa, Adv. with Ms.Shruti Verma & Ms.Aditi Mohan, Advs. versus M.K. MODI & ANOTHER Through ..... Defendants Mr.Saurabh Kripal, Adv. with Mr.Ashish Jha, Mr.Nilesh Kumar & Mr.A.Siddhartha, Advs. for D-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.O.A. No.71/2012 (Chamber Appeal against the order dated 25th April, 2012, by plaintiff) 1. By this order, I propose to decide the abovementioned Chamber Appeal filed by the plaintiff challenging the order dated 25th April, 2012 passed by the Registrar (O) wherein the Registrar (O) accepted the security furnished by defendant No.2.2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff had filed a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC for recovery of Rs.3,43,15,780/- along with pendente lite and future interest. By order dated 1st October, 2010, the application for leav...
Anil Kumar Sheel Vs. Asst. Labour Commissioner and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: December 15, 2014 + W.P.(C) 7317/2014 ANIL KUMAR SHEEL Represented by: Petitioner Mr. Rajiv Agarwal and Mr. Sachin Sharma, Advocates. ASST. LABOUR COMMISSIONER & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.V.K.Tandon and Mr. Yogesh Saini, Advocates for Respondent No.1. Mr. Parvinder Chauhan, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks directions thereby directing the respondent No.2 to implement the award dated 20.09.2006 passed in I.D. No.41/06 (Old I.D. No.44/01) by the Industrial Tribunal No.I, New Delhi.2. Mr. Rajiv Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner joined the respondent No.2 as LDC w.e.f. 20.10.1995 on monthly paid/muster roll worker and accordingly paid wages as fixed and revised from time to time under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The services of the petitioner were termi...
- ‹ Prev
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- Next ›
- Last »