Delhi Court August 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 11 of about 306 results (0.022 seconds)Pradeep Suri Vs. Simmi Suri and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:20. h August, 2014 + CRL. M.C. 1762/2012 PRADEEP SURI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Massod Hussain with Mr. Saurabh Malhotra, Advocates. versus SIMMI SURI & ORS. Through: .....Respondents Mr. O. P. Wadhwa, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH VED PRAKASH VAISH, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. No.6167/2012 This is an application for condonation of delay in refiling the present petition. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in refiling the petition is condoned. The application stands disposed of. Crl. M.C. No.1762/2012 1. This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) against order dated 06.02.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-02 (West), Delhi whereby the Criminal Revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed.2. The brief facts of the present case are that the respondents filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against the...
Tag this Judgment!ignou Vs. M/S. Bluestar Pvt Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRP No.117/2014 20th August, 2014 % IGNOU Through: ......Petitioner Ms. Charu Dalal, Advocate. VERSUS M/S. BLUESTAR PVT LTD. Through: ...... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Though this petition is filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), it actually ought to have been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and therefore this petition is treated as a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The Challenge by means of this petition is to the impugned order of the trial court dated 3.6.2014 by which the trial court has refused to recall its earlier order dated 15.4.2014 striking off the defence of the petitioner/defendant for non-filing of the written statement. The subject suit was a suit for recovery of Rs.18,99,639/- filed by the respondent/plaintiff. 3(i) The admitted facts are that the petitioner/de...
Tag this Judgment!National Association of Street Vendors of India Th Vs. South Delhi Mun ...
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:20. 08.2014 W.P.(C) 4303/2014 & CM No.8645/2014 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STREET VENDORS OF INDIA THROUGH ITS COORDINATOR ..... Petitioner versus SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS ....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Ms Indira Unninayar, Mr Narayan Krishan, Mr Ramesh Mishra, Mr Harkirat and Ms Nina Bhalla. For the Respondents : Mr Gaurang Kanth for MCD with Ms Biji Rajesh Ms Khushboo Tyagi. Mr Deepak Agarwal for FSSAI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is the National Association of Street Vendors of India. This writ petition is concerned with the public notices issued by the three Municipal Corporations of Delhi (East, South and North). These public notices were issued sometime in March, 2014. By virtue of the said public notices, the sale of cut-fruits and any articles of food or...
Tag this Judgment!M/S.Snam Electrical Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. M/S. Mahavir Electricals an ...
Court: Delhi
$~41,50&51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:20. h August, 2014 + CRL. M.C. 3402/2014 & CRL. M.A. 11765/2014 M/S. SNAM ELECTRICAL PVT. LTD. & ORS. .....Petitioners versus M/S. MAHAVIR ELECTRICALS & POWER SYSTEMS CONTROLS + .....Respondent CRL. M.C. 1276/2014 & CRL. M.A. 4338/2014 M/S. SNAM ELECTRICAL PVT. LTD. & ORS. .....Petitioners versus M/S. MAHAVIR ELECTRICALS & POWER SYSTEMS CONTROLS + .....Respondent CRL. M.C. 3403/2014 & CRL. M.A. 11767/2014 M/S. SNAM ELECTRICAL PVT. LTD. & ORS. .....Petitioners versus M/S. MAHAVIR ELECTRICALS & POWER SYSTEMS CONTROLS Present: .....Respondent Mr. Sanjeev Sindhwani, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sanjay S. Chhabra and Mr. Sunav Rastogi, Advocates. Mr. Bhagat Singh, Advocate for respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH VED PRAKASH VAISH, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. No.11768/2014 in Crl. M.C. No.3403/2014 The exemption application is allowed, subject to just exceptions. The application stands disposed of accordingly. Crl. M....
Tag this Judgment!Udey Kant Mishra Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~10 & 11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : August 20, 2014 + CRL.A. 1410/2013 UDEY KANT MISHRA Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mukesh Kalia, Advocate with Mr.Bharat Kapoor and Mr.Karan Sachdeva, Advocates with Appellant in person versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.Rajesh Kumar Mishra, SHO and SI Mahender, Sultan Puri CRL.A. 187/2014 RANI MISHRA Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.R.K.Thakur, Advocate versus STATE & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.Rajesh Kumar Mishra, SHO and SI Mahender, Sultan Puri Mr.Mukesh Kalia, Advocate with Mr.Bharat Kapoor and Mr.Karan Sachdeva, Advocates for R-2 to R-4 with R-2 to R-4 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Rani Mishra, wife of Kamlesh Mishra is aggrieved by the fact that vide impugned decision dated October 04, 2013, the learned Trial Judge has acquitted Uday Kant ...
Tag this Judgment!Rajender Singh Vs. Harpreet Kaur and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order delivered on:20. h August, 2014 % + I.A. No.13307/2012 in CS(OS) No.2164/2011 RAJENDER SINGH Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.L.B.Rai, Adv. with Ms.Nachiketa Goyal, Adv. versus HARPREET KAUR & ORS ..Defendants Through Ms.Ankita Prabhakar, Adv. with Ms.Shweta Pokhriyal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. By this order, I propose to decide application being I.A. No.13307/2012 under Section 144 read with Section 151 CPC filed by defendant No.1 seeking for restoration of the counter-claim.2. The plaintiff filed the above said suit for partition, possession, permanent injunction and cancellation of sale deed dated 23rd March, 2011, relinquishment deed dated 7th February, 2001 and partition deed, against the defendants.3. Upon service, defendant No.1 filed the written statement on 5th December, 2011 as well as a counter-claim against the plaintiff for granting a decree for a sum of Rs.30 lacs as damages along w...
Tag this Judgment!Bikash Ranjan Rout Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:01. t August, 2014 Date of Decision:20. h August, 2014 % + CRL. M.C. No.3386/2013 BIKASH RANJAN ROUT Through: ........Petitioner Mr. Gautam Kumar & Mr. Niranjan Behera, Advocates. Versus STATE Through: .......Respondent Mr. Praveen Bhati, APP for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH JUDGMENT1 By way of present petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), the petitioner has assailed the order dated 05.02.2013 passed by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (West), Delhi and letter dated 22.04.2013 under Section 160 Cr.P.C sent by District Investigation Unit, West District, Police Post MIG Flats, J-Block, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi.2. Shorn off unnecessary details the facts of the case are that the complainant, Akshay Jain lodged a complaint dated 28.09.2007 on the basis of which FIR No.426/2007 under Sections 420/468/471 IPC was registered at P.S. Jan...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Chand @ Ramesh Kumar Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:20. h August, 2014 + CRL. M.C. 2317/2014 RAMESH CHAND @ RAMESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. R.P. Luthra, Advocate. versus STATE & ANR. Through: .....Respondents Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for the State. Mr. Sudhir Nagar, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH VED PRAKASH VAISH, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking setting aside of order dated 05.04.2014 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate (North East), Karkardooma, Delhi whereby the opportunity to file an application under Section 145(2) of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as NI Act) was closed.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that the respondent No.2 filed a complaint under Section 138 of NI Act bearing CC No.160/2013 titled Varsha Ritu vs. Ramesh Chand. The cognizance was taken and the petitioner was summoned by learned Metropolitan Magist...
Tag this Judgment!Nanak G. Sheth Vs. Cbi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:20. h August, 2014 + CRL. M.C. 3509/2014 NANAK G. SHETH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. O.P. Malviya with Mr. Satya Narayan, Advocates. versus CBI Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Narender Mann, Spl. PP for CBI with Mr. Manoj Pant and Ms. Utkarsha Kohli, Advocates with Inspector R.D. Sharma, CBI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH VED PRAKASH VAISH, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the order dated 02.08.2014 passed by learned Special Judge, CBI-03 (PC Act), Delhi.2. In short the facts of the present case are that RC No.2 (S)/81/SIC-I/CBI/New Delhi under Section 5 of Official Secret Act read with Section 409/120B of IPC was registered against the petitioner and he was arrested on 17.03.1981. The petitioner filed a petition bearing Criminal Misc. (M) No.159/1981 before learned Special Judge, CBI, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. Vide order dated 14.04.1981, the p...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwant Singh Decd. Thr. Lrs. Vs. Gurcharan Kaur and anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.1184/2010 &CM No.16527/2010 (stay) 20th August, 2014 % BHAGWANT SINGH DECD. THR. LRS. ......Petitioner Through: Mr. Ram Niwas, Advocate. VERSUS GURCHARAN KAUR & ANR. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. S.C.Singhal, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. (Yes) VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order of the first appellate court dated 12.7.2010 by which the first appellate court has allowed the application filed by the respondents/landlord (petitioner in the eviction petition) for appointment of a local commissioner/expert/architect for reporting the position of construction in the tenanted premises. The subject eviction petition is a petition under Section 14(1)(j) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short the Act) and which provides that a tenant who makes unauthorized additions and alternations to a tenanted premi...
Tag this Judgment!