Delhi Court March 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.
Smt.Poonam Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5369/2012 & CM APPL. 10957/2012 SMT.POONAM ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Pardeep Gupta, Advocate with Ms. Aarti Shakalya, Ms. Poonam Mutreja, Mr. Vishal Gupta and Ms. Mansi Ajmani, Advocates. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Sonia Arora, Advocate with Ms.Heena Mongia, Ms. Pallavi Shali, Advocates for R-1 to R-3. Mr. Yogesh Kumar, Advocate for R-4. Date of Decision :07. h March, 2014 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 18 th July, 2012 whereby respondent No.4 has been issued authorisation to run a Fair Price Shop in Baba Colony, Burari, New Delhi. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner had also applied for the Fair Price Shop, but was unsuccessful.2. Mr. Pardeep Gupta, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the allocation of Fair Price Shop to respondent No.4 is violative of Rule 3(6)(4) ...
Khushal Chand Vs. the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 109 of 2008 KHUSHAL CHAND ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.C. Sagar and Mr. Pradeep Sehrawat, Advocates. versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP with Inspector Arvind Kumar, SHO Kalyan Puri. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER0703.2014 1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 18th December 2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.273/06 convicting the Appellant for the offences under Section 306/498A of the IPC and the order of sentence dated 18 th December 2007 by which the Appellant was sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment (RI) and a fine of Rs. 10,000 and in default of the payment, to undergo nine months RI under Section 498A IPC and further sentenced to undergo seven years RI and a fine of Rs. 10,000 and in default of the payment, to undergo a further nine months RI under Section 306 IPC.2. The case of the prosecution was that ...
Delhi College of Education Vs. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha Universi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
#32 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 782/2014 & CM APPL. 1564/2014 DELHI COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjay Sahrawat, Advocate versus GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Mukul Talwar with Mr. Sradhananda Mohaptra, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate for R-2 and 3. Date of Decision :07. h March, 2014 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present writ petition has been filed primarily seeking a direction to respondent-University to follow the mandate of Clause 7(9) of National Council of Teacher Education Regulations, 2009 (for short Regulations, 2009) and to approve the Faculty List submitted by petitioner to enable it to furnish the same to respondent-NCTE for final decision for grant of recognition.2. The facts of the present case are that on 26th November, 2012 a public notice was issued inviting fresh applications seeking permission to start various course...
Oriental Insurance Co Ltd Vs. Dinesh Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:7. h March, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 664/2012 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Versus DINESH SINGH & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. S.K. Pandey and Ms. Tarannum, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP. 664/2012 1. The Present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 12.03.2012, whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.1,94,554/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that offending vehicle was stolen in the year 2007. The police had filed the untraced report. Thereafter, the appellant / Insurance Company settled the claim with the owner of the offending vehicle. Thereafter on 09.07.2009, the accident in question had taken place in which respondent No.1 sustained inj...
Santu Dass Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:03.03.2014 Judgment delivered on:-06.03.2014 CRL.A. 132/2006 SANTU DASS Through ..... Appellant Mr.Shakti Chand Sharma, Adv. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through ..... Respondent Mr. Varun Goswami, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 30.01.2006 and 31.01.2006 respectively wherein the appellant has been convicted under Section 363 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo RI for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 1 month. 2 The present FIR had been registered at PS Vasant Kunj on the statement of the mother of the victim namely Tulsa Devi examined as PW-2. She had lodged a missing report on 14.10.2002 stating that her daughter was missing since 30.09.2002. Her allegation was that appellant Santu Dass had kidnapped her daughter R aged about 16 years fro...
State Vs. Mohd. Yasin
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
$~R-38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Reserved on:03. 03.2014 Judgment Delivered on :07.03.2014 CRL.A. 135/2006 STATE Through ..... Appellant Mr.Varun Goswami, APP. versus MOHD. YASIN Through ..... Respondent Mr.Sakesh Kumar and Ms.Charu Singhal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 This appeal has been filed by the State. Vide the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 05.10.2005 the appellant Mohd. Yasin had been convicted under Section 21(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) and had been sentenced to undergo the period already suffered by him noting the fact that he had been in custody for more than two years. 2 The State is aggrieved by the aforenoted judgment. 3 Admittedly in this case one kilogram of heroin was recovered from the appellant. The drug had been sent to the FSL for examination. The report of the FSL is dated 23.01.2004. It disclosed t...
Krishna Devi Vs. Kartar Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % KRISHNA DEVI TR.P(C) 106/2013 Through:7. h March, 2014 ......Petitioner Mr. Vishal Bhatnagar, Mr. Vineet Gandhi and Mr. Nitin Sharma, Advocates. VERSUS KARTAR SINGH Through: ...... Respondent Mr. Shekhar Dasi, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this petition, petitioner who is the appellant in the Regular Civil Appeal bearing No.36/2013 titled as Krishna Devi Vs. Kartar Singh Bidhuri presently pending in the court of Sh. Anil Kumar Sisodia, ADJ (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi seeks transfer of the appeal to the competent civil court at District Courts Saket, New Delhi inasmuch as the appeal pertains to the suit property at Sangam Vihar which is in the territorial jurisdiction of the District Courts at Saket.2. Aforesaid facts show that the appeal has been wrongly filed in a court not having territorial jurisdiction at Tis Hazari Courts, inasmuch as the appe...
State Vs. Fatima
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
$~R-37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Reserved on:04.03.2014 Judgment Delivered on :07.3.2014 CRL.A. 134/2006 STATE Through ..... Appellant Mr.Navin K. Jha, APP. versus FATIMA Through ..... Respondent Mr.Jetendra Sethi and Mr. Hemendra Jailiya, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 This appeal has been filed by the State. Vide the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 21.9.2005 the appellant Fatima had been convicted under Section 21(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) and had been sentenced to undergo the period already suffered by her noting the fact that she had been in custody for 3 years and more than 1 month. 2 The State is aggrieved by the aforenoted judgment. 3 Admittedly in this case 500 grams heroin was recovered from the appellant. The drug had been sent to the FSL for examination. The report of the FSL is dated 05.2.2004. It disclosed that ...
Siddhidatri Agro Private Ltd. Vs. Shoua Shams Est. Importers and Expor ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.334/2013 7th March, 2014 % SIDDHIDATRI AGRO PRIVATE LTD. ......Appellant Through: Mr. Shivram and Mr. Niraj Jha, Advocates. VERSUS SHOUA SHAMS EST. IMPORTERS AND EXPORTERS ...... Respondent Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This first appeal is filed under Order 43 Rule 1(a) CPC impugning the judgment of the court below dated 29.5.2013 which has returned the plaint for filing in the court of competent jurisdiction. Para-25 of the plaint on the basis of which jurisdiction at Delhi is invoked reads as under:25. That the cause of action arose in Delhi since the agreement dated 20.01.2010 clearly stipulates that any disputes arising in between the parties to it will be dealt/decided under the jurisdiction of New Delhi. Further various correspondence via emails were sent by the plaintiff to the defendant from Delhi. Further, the legal notice was sent by th...
India Infoline Ltd. Vs. Sanjay Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.66/2011 & CM29262011 (Stay) 7th March, 2014 % INDIA INFOLINE LTD. Through: ......Appellant Mr. Mukesh M. Goel, Mr. Prem Grover, Advocates VERSUS SANJAY GUPTA ...... Respondent Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Respondent has failed to appear for many hearings in spite of being served. I have therefore heard the counsel for the appellant.2. Respondent was the claimant in the arbitration proceedings. Out of five claims made by the respondent, who is the constituent member of the appellant/broker in the multi-commodity exchange, four claims were dismissed and one claim with respect to the claim of lots of Rs. 1 lakh was allowed by the arbitrator. This claim of Rs. 1 lac was allowed on the ground that the appellant/broker did not modify the bid with respect to four lots of sugar although instructions were received before end of the closing of the trade ...
- ‹ Prev
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- Next ›
- Last »