Delhi Court July 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 21 of about 371 results (0.019 seconds)Sameer Sabharwal and ors Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3073/2014 SAMEER SABHARWAL & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Ashish Singh, Advocate versus STATE & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. P.K. Mishra, APP with SI Dharmendra PS Dwarka North CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) CRL.M.A. No.10624/2014 Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed off. CRL.M.C. 3073/2014 1. This Criminal Miscellaneous case has been moved by the petitioners under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.195/2013 registered under Section 498A/406 IPC, Police Station Dwarka North, South-West Delhi, New Delhi. It is stated that the chargesheet in the matter has not yet been filed.2. Issue notice.3. Counsel for the State, as well as counsel for the complainant, Mrs.Shalu Sabharwal, who is arrayed as respondent No.2 herein, enters appearance and accepts notice.4. It is stat...
Tag this Judgment!Genco Officers Assocaition and anr Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:16. 07.2014 W.P.(C) 6130/2013 GENCO OFFICERS ASSOCAITION & ANR ... Petitioners versus Respondents UNION OF INDIA & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner For the Respondent For the Respondent For the Respondent For the Respondent No.1 No.2 No.3 No.4 For the Respondent Nos.6 & 7 : : : : : Mr S. D. Windlesh Mr Himanshu Bajaj Ms Zubeda Begum with Ms Sana Ansari Mr R. V. Sinha with Mr A. S. Singh Mr P. K. Sharma with Mr Rakesh Sharma and Ms Somi Mehra : Ms Avnish Ahlawat with Ms Latika Chaudhary CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition has been filed on the ground that no action was being taken by the respondents and particularly the respondent No.3 pursuant to the complaint dated 03.10.2012 with regard to certain alleged activities in Pragati Power Corporation Limited and Indraprastha Power Generation Company ...
Tag this Judgment!Sandeep Kumar Vs. Union of India and anr
Court: Delhi
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6034/2013 SANDEEP KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. K.G. Sharma, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Amrit Pal Singh, CGSC and Ms.Gurjinder Kaur, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI ORDER % 16.07.2014 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner seeks to set aside and quash the order dated 19/21 August, 2013 and to direct respondent No.2 to appoint the petitioner forthwith against the offered post of constable in CAPFS.2. Counsel for the petitioner states that there is no concealment on the part of the petitioner so as to suppress his alleged involvement in the criminal complaint registered against him vide FIR No.83/2011 under Sections 323 & 325 read with Section 34 of IPC, as the relevant documents relating to the said criminal case were filed by the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Gobinda Ch. Behera and ors Vs. Union of India and anr
Court: Delhi
$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2767/2014 GOBINDA CH. BEHERA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Prashant Sivarajan, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Himanshu Bajaj, CGSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI % KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.1. ORDER1607.2014 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner seeks for quashing the signals dated January 4, 2014 and February 6, 2014 and to fix the pay of the petitioner at Rs.9910/- with effect from January 01, 2006.2. The facts relevant to the case at hand are that the petitioner joined the CRPF in the year 2003 as HC(RO) in the pay scale of Rs.3200-854900. After implementation of 6th Central Pay Commission, the pay of the petitioner was revised to Rs.5200-20200/- with Grade Pay of Rs.2000/- . The pay of the petitioner was refixed by the concerned signal Unit and audited by IAP-III at R...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and anr Vs. A.K.Mehrotra and ors
Court: Delhi
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:16. 07.2014 + W.P. (C) 2343/2012 C.M. APPL.5039/2012 UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Ms. Geetanjali Mohan, Advocate. versus A.K.MEHROTRA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A.K. Trivedi, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The short controversy arising for consideration is whether the seniority of the 10% Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) quota candidates for filling up vacancies for the post of Commercial Apprentices within the Railways is to be reckoned from their date of empanelment after selection in the LDCE test, or from the dates of their joining the said post after undergoing training.2. The facts necessary for deciding the case are that the respondents qualified in the LDCE quota held in 1983. They were apparently initially selected and serving in the posts of ...
Tag this Judgment!Praveen Kumar Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:15. h July, 2014. + LPA4502014 & CM No.10377/2014 (for stay) PRAVEEN KUMAR Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Rakesh Khanna, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sarvesh Bisaria, Advocate. Versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ........Respondents Through: Mr. V.K. Tandon, with Mr. Yogesh Saini, Advocates for R-1&2. Mr. Rajesh Sabharwal, Advocate for R-3 MCD (North). CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW\ RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. This intra court appeal impugns the order dated 8 th May, 2014 of the learned Single Judge, of dismissal of W.P.(C) No.285/2012 preferred by the appellant, for the reason of the same containing allegations of fraud, forgery and theft and which the learned Single Judge held, could not be adjudicated upon in writ proceedings; the appellant was however given opportunity to raise all the grievances as raised in the writ petition with regard to the demarcation report/map dated 28th December, 2011 befo...
Tag this Judgment!Shailender Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: July 15, 2014 + CRL.A. 1272/2010 SHAILENDER Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms.Inderjeet Sidhu, Advocate versus STATE OF DELHI Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP with Insp.Sudhir Kumar, PS Bhajanpura CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Charged for having poured kerosene oil on his wife and thereafter setting her on fire in the matrimonial home at the mid-night of the intervening night of 22nd and 23rd April, 2008, thereby causing the death of his wife, vide impugned judgment dated September 06, 2010 the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and vide order on sentence dated September 15, 2010 has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine in sum of `10,000/-; in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for six months.2. To establish its case the prosecution has led evidence of an eye w...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Gambhir Vs. Tara Chand and Others
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NE W DELHI Order Reserved on:23. rd April, 2014 Order Pronounced on:15. th July, 2014 CS(OS) 2149/2010 SHYAM GAM BHIR ...... PLAINTIFF Through: Mr. Yashank Adhiyaru, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ashish Wad, Ms. Kanika Baweja and Ms. Nidhi Revoo, Advocates. versus T ARA CHAND & OTHERS Through: ..... DEFENDANTS Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate for D-1(a), Mr. Vaibhav Kalra, Advocate for D-1(b), Mr. Satish Kumar Tripathi, Advocate for D-5, Mr. Shyam Moorjani and Mr. M.A. Khan, Advocates for D-6 CORA M: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.IA NOS. 2752/2012 (under Order VII Rule 11 CPC by Defendant No.5) & 17686/2012 (under Order VII Rule 11 CPC by Defendant No.6) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for specific performance, declaration and permanent injunction seeking specific performance of Agreement dated 25.11.2007 in respect of property bearing No.95, Ishwar Nagar, Khasra No.1522/328, situated at Okhla Extension, Bagh Shambhu Dayal at Bhapur, N...
Tag this Judgment!Raman Chopra Vs. Indian Bank and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~28 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.4268/2014 Date of decision:15. h July, 2014 RAMAN CHOPRA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. S.L. Gupta, Mr. J.P. Gupta & Mr. Virendra Singh, Advocates. versus INDIAN BANK & ORS. ..... Respondents Through Ms. Seema Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 27 th June, 2014. The facts of the case are glaring. The respondent bank had filed recovery proceedings under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 in the year 2000. They had prayed for a decree of Rs.39,16,466.90 with pendante lite and future interest. Before the tribunal the respondent bank had placed on record copy of the guarantee deed executed by Arvind Chopra and Susheela Chopra, brother and mother of the present petitioner. The loan was granted to Suman W.P. (C) No.4268/...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Anis and anr Vs. Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT New Delhi Judgment Reserved on: July 10 , 2014 Judgment Delivered on: July 15 , 2014 % + CRL.A. 532/1998 MOHD. ANIS & ANR Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.M.L.Yadav, Adv. versus NCT OF DELHI Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. By the present appeal, the appellants had challenged the judgment dated August 13, 1998 convicting them for offences under Sections 302/307/34 IPC and the order on sentence dated August 18, 1998 directing them to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of `3000/- each for offences under Sections 302/34 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of `5000/- for offence punishable under Section 307/34 IPC. During the pendency of the present appeal, appellant No.1 passed away and thus the appeal qua him stood abated. Thus, the present appeal is now confined to appellant No.2 Mohd.Khalid S/o Mo...
Tag this Judgment!