Delhi Court July 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 6 of about 371 results (0.032 seconds)Vijay Pal Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL APPEAL No.980/2010 Reserved on :7. h July, 2014 Date of decision:30. h July, 2014 VIJAY PAL ..... Appellant Through Mr. M.L. Yadav, Advocate. Versus STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.: Appellant-Vijay Pal has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short) by the impugned judgment dated 20th July, 2010, for murder of Geeta. Appellant has also been convicted under Sections 449 and 506 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. By order on sentence dated 22nd July, 2010, the appellant has been sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offences under Section 302 as well as 449 IPC. For the offence under Section 506 IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs.5,000/- and for the offence under Section 27...
Tag this Judgment!Shabnam Vs. State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: July 30 , 2014 + CRL.A.444/2012 SHABNAM Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr. Kunal Aurora, Advocate for Ms. Anu Narula, Advocate. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Represented by: .... Respondent Mr. Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Sanjeev Kumar, PS Okhla Industrial Area. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA (ORAL) 1. Shabnam stands convicted for the offence of murdering her sister Zulekha on the strength of the testimony of PW-10 Kamaal, husband of the deceased and the recovery of the hammer at the instance of Shabnam. The learned Trial Court while holding Shabnam guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 IPC vide the impugned judgment dated December 23, 2011 has directed her to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of `10,000/- in default of payment of fine to undergone rigorous imprisonment for two months vide order dated December 24, 2011.2. Shorn of un...
Tag this Judgment!Sitara Media Ventures Private Limited Andanr. Vs. ..........
Court: Delhi
$~37 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Co. Appl. (M) No.114/2014 IN THE MATTER OF SITARA MEDIA VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED &A NR. .. Applicant Through: Mr. Sougat Sinha, Advocate for the Applicant CORA M: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER3007.2014 % SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a first motion joint Application under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short Act) in connection with a Scheme of Amalgamation (for short Scheme) of Sitara Media Ventures Private Limited referred (hereinafter Company) with C&C Limited (hereinafter Alpha referred to as Transferor Group India Private to as Transferee Company) (hereinafter both Companies collectively referred to as Applicant Companies) and their ======================================================================= CO. Appl. (M) No.114/2014 1 respective Shareholders. The Scheme has been enclosed with the Application.2. The registered offices of the Applicant Companies are situated at New Delhi, within the...
Tag this Judgment!Sh.Lok Nath and ors. Vs. Sh.Ashok Kumar
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 360/2012 & C.M.No.5474/2012(for exemption) 30th July, 2014 % SH.LOK NATH & ORS. Through: ...... Petitioners Ms.Kamlakshi Singh with Mr.S.K.Kapoor, Advocates. VERSUS SH.ASHOK KUMAR Through: ...... Respondent Mr.Bhupesh Narula, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The challenge by means of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the impugned order of the Additional Rent Control Tribunal dated 17.1.2012. The Additional Rent Control Tribunal by the impugned judgment has decided two appeals. One appeal was filed by the landlords and the other appeal was by the tenant both against the judgment/order of the Additional Rent Controller dated 09.11.2009. The judgment/order dated 09.11.2009 is a consequential order pursuant to the main judgment deciding the petition filed by the petitioners/landlords under Section 14(1)(a) (non-payme...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and ors. Vs. Shruti
Court: Delhi
$~28 TO37* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :30. 07.2014 + + + + + + + W.P.(C) 6539/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus NEHA KADAM W.P.(C) 6571/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus SIDHARTH GUPTA W.P.(C) 6585/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus BHAGWAN SAHAI MEENA W.P.(C) 6789/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus AJAY KUMAR AND ORS. W.P.(C) 6792/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus RAHUL AND ANR. W.P.(C) 339/2014, C.M. No.666/2014 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus RUBY AND ANR W.P.(C) 355/2014, C.M. NO.708/2014 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus W.P.(C) 6505/2013 and connected cases ..Petitioners Respondent ..Petitioners Respondent ..Petitioners Respondent ..Petitioners Respondents ..Petitioners Respondents ..Petitioners Respondents ..Petitioners Page 1 ANJALI + + + Respondent W.P.(C) 762/2014, C.M. NO.1528/2014 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus SHRUTI W.P.(C) 5106/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus SONIA W.P.(C) 5192/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus VARSHA ..Petitioners Respo...
Tag this Judgment!RategaIn It Solutions Private Limited and anr Vs. ...........
Court: Delhi
$~36 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Co. Appl. (M) No.113/2014 IN THE MATTER OF RATEGAIN IT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR .Applicant Through: Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Advocate for the Applicants. CORA M: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER % 30.07.2014 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a first motion joint Application under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short Act) in connection with a Scheme of Arrangement (for short Scheme) of RateGain IT Solutions Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Demerged Company) with Ridaan Real Estate Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Resulting Company) (hereinafter both Companies collectively referred to as Applicant Companies) and their respective ================================================================ CO. Appl. (M) No.113/2014 1 Shareholders. The Scheme has been enclosed with the Application.2. The registered offices of the Applicant Companies are situated at New Delhi, within the jurisdicti...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and ors. Vs. Bhagwan Sahai Meena
Court: Delhi
$~28 TO37* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :30. 07.2014 + + + + + + + W.P.(C) 6539/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus NEHA KADAM W.P.(C) 6571/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus SIDHARTH GUPTA W.P.(C) 6585/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus BHAGWAN SAHAI MEENA W.P.(C) 6789/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus AJAY KUMAR AND ORS. W.P.(C) 6792/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus RAHUL AND ANR. W.P.(C) 339/2014, C.M. No.666/2014 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus RUBY AND ANR W.P.(C) 355/2014, C.M. NO.708/2014 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus W.P.(C) 6505/2013 and connected cases ..Petitioners Respondent ..Petitioners Respondent ..Petitioners Respondent ..Petitioners Respondents ..Petitioners Respondents ..Petitioners Respondents ..Petitioners Page 1 ANJALI + + + Respondent W.P.(C) 762/2014, C.M. NO.1528/2014 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus SHRUTI W.P.(C) 5106/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus SONIA W.P.(C) 5192/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus VARSHA ..Petitioners Respo...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and ors. Vs. Sonia
Court: Delhi
$~28 TO37* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :30. 07.2014 + + + + + + + W.P.(C) 6539/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus NEHA KADAM W.P.(C) 6571/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus SIDHARTH GUPTA W.P.(C) 6585/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus BHAGWAN SAHAI MEENA W.P.(C) 6789/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus AJAY KUMAR AND ORS. W.P.(C) 6792/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus RAHUL AND ANR. W.P.(C) 339/2014, C.M. No.666/2014 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus RUBY AND ANR W.P.(C) 355/2014, C.M. NO.708/2014 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus W.P.(C) 6505/2013 and connected cases ..Petitioners Respondent ..Petitioners Respondent ..Petitioners Respondent ..Petitioners Respondents ..Petitioners Respondents ..Petitioners Respondents ..Petitioners Page 1 ANJALI + + + Respondent W.P.(C) 762/2014, C.M. NO.1528/2014 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus SHRUTI W.P.(C) 5106/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus SONIA W.P.(C) 5192/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus VARSHA ..Petitioners Respo...
Tag this Judgment!Sanddep @ Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Rohilla and ors Vs. Pooja and ors
Court: Delhi
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3300/2014 SANDDEP @ SANDEEP KUMAR @ SANDEEP ROHILLA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Charanjeet & Mr. Pavitra Veer Chikar, Advocates versus POOJA & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Ranvir Singh, Adv. for R-1 Ms. Nishi Jain, APP for State with SI Nitin, PS Nand Nagri CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA ORDER % 30.07.2014 CRL.M.A. 11413/2014 Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed off. CRL.M.C. 3300/2014 1. This petition has been moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.5/08 registered under Section 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, on 04.01.2008 at Police Station Nand Nagri, Delhi, and proceedings emanating therefrom.2. It is stated that the FIR came to be registered as a result of certain matrimonial disputes between the petitioner No.1, Sandeep @ Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Rohilla and respondent No.1/compl...
Tag this Judgment!Advance Agencies Private Limited and ors Vs. .........
Court: Delhi
$~24 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CO.PET.610 /2013 IN THE MATTER OF ADVANCE AGENCIES PRIVATE ..... Petitioner LIMITED & ORS Through: Mr. Rajeev K Goel and Mr Naresh Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Atma Sah, Assistant Registrar of Companies for the Regional Director. Mr. Rajiv Bhel, Advocate for the official Liquidator. CORA M: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER3007.2014 % SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) 1. This second motion joint Petition has been filed under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) seeking Amalgamation Private sanction (Scheme) to of the Scheme Advance Ltd (Transferor Company of Agencies No.1), Suvi Consultants and Engineers Private Ltd (Transferor Company No.2), Radhey Tradecom Private Ltd (Transferor Company No.3), Rite Choice E -Services ================================================== CO.PET. 610 /2013 1 Private Ltd (Transferor Company No.4) and Moon Light Consultancy Private Ltd (Transferor Company No.5) with Splendor Cons...
Tag this Judgment!