Delhi Court May 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.
Shamim Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl. Appeal No.175/2011 Reserved on:6. h May, 2014 Date of Decision:19. h May, 2014 % Shamim Through Mr. Singh Charak, Adv. ....Appellant Virender Pratap Versus State Through Respondent Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G. P. MITTAL SANJIV KHANNA, J.The appellant Shamim and one Anzar (who was subsequently declared juvenile), were prosecuted for murder of Ashraf in the intervening night between 24th 25th August, 2007. The impugned judgment dated 19th October, 2010, convicts the appellant under Section 302 IPC as well as Section 392 read with Section 34 IPC for murder and robbery. By order on sentence dated 30th October, 2010, the appellant Shamim has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/- for the offence under Section 302 IPC, and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Similarly, rigorous imprisonment for 6 years and fine of Rs.3000/- and i...
Pepsico, Inc and anr. Vs. Psi Ganesh Marketing and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision :19. h May, 2014 % + CS(OS) 157/2013 PEPSICO, INC & ANR. Through : ..... Plaintiff Ms. Saya Choudhary Ms.Anusuya Nigam, Ms. Deepthi Alexander, Advs. versus PSI GANESH MARKETING & ANR. Through : ..... Defendants CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. The plaintiffs have filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining violation and infringement of rights in the trade mark, trade name, label AQUAFINA, infringement of copyright, rendition of accounts, dilution, and delivery up. Summons were issued in the suit on 29.01.2013 and on 21.08.2013. On an application for appointment of Local Commissioner being filed by the plaintiffs, a Local Commissioner was appointed in the matter. Since none appeared on behalf of defendants despite service, defendants were proceeded ex parte on 15.01.2014.2. Plaintiffs have filed affidavit by way of evidence of Director-Legal at the Plaintiff No.2 Company and the aut...
Dinesh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL APPEAL No.310/1999 Reserved on:20. h February, 2014 Date of Decision:19. h May, 2014 % DINESH Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Vinod Pant, Advocate. Versus STATE Through: State. ..... Respondent Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL SANJIV KHANNA, J: Appellant-Dinesh and one Arjun Kumar (Arjun, for short) by the impugned judgment dated 1st May, 1999 were convicted for murder of Arjuns father, namely, Devi Ram. Arjun had also preferred an appeal against conviction, but he expired on 31st March, 2008 and the appeal filed by him has abated. Hence, we are only concerned with the conviction of Dinesh under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short). By order on the point of sentence dated 3rd May, 1999, Dinesh has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.500/-.2. The factum that Devi Ram, father of Arjun died a homici...
Mohd. Fazal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl. Appeal No.243/2009 Reserved on:25. h February, 2014 Date of Decision :19. h May, 2014 % Mohd. Fazal Through ....Appellant Mr. R.M. Tufail, Amicus Curiae with Mr. Anwar A. Khan, Mr. Farooq Chaudhary and Mr. Vishal Raj Sehijpal, Advs. Versus State Through Respondent Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP. Crl. Appeal 230/2009 Suraiya Through ....Appellant Mr. R.M. Tufail, Amicus Curiae with Mr. Anwar A. Khan, Mr. Farooq Chaudhary And Mr. Vishal Raj Sehijpal, Advs. Versus State Through Respondent Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP. Crl. Rev. Petition 361/2009 Naseem Bano Through ....Appellant Mohd. Saleem, Advocate. Versus State Through Respondent Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP. Crl. Appeal 511/2009 Mohan Seth Through ....Appellant Mr. R.M. Tufail, Amicus Curiae with Mr. Anwar A. Khan, Mr. Farooq Chaudhary And Mr. Vishal Raj Sehijpal, Advs. Versus State Through Respondent Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP. Crl. Appeal 1231/2010 State Govt. of NCT of Delhi ....Appellant Through Ms. R...
Amarjit Sharma Vs. Dda
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7436/2012, 7779/2012 and 7843/2012 Decided on :19. 05.2014 IN THE MATTERS OF AMARJIT SHARMA SUMAN CHOUDHRY GAINDHAR KUSUM JAIN Through: ..... Petitioner in W.P.(C) 7436/2012 ..... Petitioner in W.P.(C) 7779/2012 ..... Petitioner in W.P.(C) 7843/2012 Mr. R.K. Saini, Advocate versus DDA ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Shobhana Takiar, Advocate CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners challenging the action of the respondent/DDA in cancelling the allotment of a MIG/LIG flat made in their favour under the New Pattern Registration Scheme, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as NPRS-1979) without making any effort to serve them at their occupational addresses that were furnished by them at the time of registration and further, for issuance of directions to the respondent/DDA to allot them an alternative MIG/LIG flat, as per entitlement in the same area/sector as had bee...
Tanu Goel and anr Vs. Girish Chopra and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:16. h May, 2014. % + CS(OS) 669/2011 TANU GOEL & ANR Through: ..... Plaintiffs Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sudhir Talwar & Ms. Jagriti Ahuja, Advs. Versus GIRISH CHOPRA & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sanjay Goswami, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The two plaintiffs have sued for specific performance of an Agreement of Sale of third floor along with terrace rights of property No.9, Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi constructed over land admeasuring 450 sq. yds, together with one servant quarter having common WC on the terrace floor and one car parking space in the drive way, and in the alternative, for recovery, of Rs.1 crore already paid as advance to the three defendants and Rs.3,25,00,000/- as damages, pleading: (i) that the defendants No.1 & 2 i.e. Sh. Girish Chopra and Smt. Ashima Chopra vide Agreement to Sell dated 15th June, 2010 agreed to sell the aforesaid property to the two plaintiffs for ...
Delhi Shramik Sangathan Vs. Manish Gupta and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Reserved on: May 07, 2014 Judgment Pronounced on: May 16, 2014 CONT.CAS (C) 176/2014 DELHI SHRAMIK SANGATHAN ..... Petitioner Represented by: Ms.Indira Unninayar, Advocate with Mr.Kirat Randhawa, Mr.Narayan Krishan and Ms.Nina Bhalla, Advocates versus MANISH GUPTA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Gaurang Kanth, Advocate for SDMC Mr.Nawal Kishore Jha, Advocate for R-11 and R-13 Mr.Anurag Gohil, Advocate for Mr.Sonal K.Singh, Advocate for R12 Mr.Sanjeev Goyal, Advocate with Mr.Anurag Pati, Advocate for R-16 Mr.Anjum Javed, Advocate for R11 to R-36 W.P.(C) 144/2013 DELHI SHRAMIK SANGATHAN ..... Petitioner Represented by: Ms.Indira Unninayar, Advocate with Mr.Kirat Randhawa, Mr.Narayan Krishan and Ms.Nina Bhalla, Advocates versus DELHI POLICE & ORS. Represented by: Cont.Cas.(C) No.176/14 & W.P.(C) No.144/13 ..... Respondents Mr.Anjum Javed, Advocate for Delhi Police Page 1 of 11 Mr.Gaurang Kanth, Advocate for SDMC CORAM: HON...
In Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jamna Datwani and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Reserved on : May 02, 2014 Judgment Pronounced on : May 16, 2014 FAO(OS) 592/2013 JANAK DATWANI Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Sanjeev Sindhwani, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Ayush Agrawal, Adv. Versus JAMNA DATWANI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Tara V.Ganju with Ms.Preeti Gupta, Advs for Jamna Datwani. Ms. Diya Kapur, Advocate for Nitya Bharany. Mr. Akhil Sachar (proxy counsel) for Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate for Kishan Datwani. Mr.Suresh Singh for Anand Datwani FAO(OS) 593/2013 IN EXPORTS PVT LTD Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Abhimanyu Mahajan, Adv. with Mr.Milan Deep Singh, Adv. Versus JAMNA DATWANI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Tara V.Ganju with Ms.Preeti Gupta, Advs for Jamna Datwani. Ms. Diya Kapur, Advocate for Nitya Bharaney. Mr. Akhil Sachar (proxy counsel) for Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate for Kishan Datwani. Mr.Suresh Datwani Singh for Anand CORAM: HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP ...
Vinod Kumar Arora Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: May 16th, 2014 % + CRL.A. 304/2000 VINOD KUMAR ARORA ..... Appellant Through : Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr.Adv. with Mr.M.L.Yadav, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Pawan Sharma, Standing Counsel(Crl.) for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.1. By way of this appeal, appellant Vinod Kumar, husband of deceased Rajbala @ Rajni has challenged the judgment dated 13.5.2000 and order of sentence dated 16.5.2000 passed by the ld.Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi whereby he has been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 304B/498A IPC and has been sentenced to undergo RI for seven years u/s 304B IPC and to further undergo RI for one year and a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default to further undergo RI for three months u/s 498A IPC. It has further been ordered that both the sentences shall run concurrently.2. Briefly the facts relevant for the disposal of the present appeals are that:On 8.5.1991, Avinash Cha...
Union of India Vs. Sh. Ravi@ravindra Prakash
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO1412014 % 16th May, 2014 UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through: None Versus SH. RAVI@RAVINDRA PRAKASH ..... Respondent Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM86132014 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM86142014 (Delay) For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application is accordingly disposed of. +FAO1412014 & CM86152014 (Stay) 1. No one was present for the appellant on the first call. Even on the second call no one is present although it is 2.25 P.M. I have therefore perused the record and am proceeding to decide this appeal.2. This first appeal is filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 impugning the judgment of the Tribunal dated 20.11.2013 which has allowed the claim petition filed by the respondent for the injuries sustained by him in an untoward incident on 29.9.2...
- ‹ Prev
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- Next ›
- Last »