Delhi Court September 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 17 of about 257 results (0.021 seconds)M.P.Singh Sahni and anr. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :5. h SEPTEMBER, 2014 DECIDED ON :10. h SEPTEMBER, 2014 + CRL.M.C. 2444-45/2005 M.P.SINGH SAHNI & ANR. Through : ..... Petitioners Mr.Arvind K.Gupta, Advocate with Mr.Anshul Garg and Mr.Abhishek Goyal, Advocates. VERSUS STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.CRL.M.A.Nos.1623/2014 & 18611/2013 in Crl.M.C.2444-45/2005 1. By this common order, Crl.M.A.No.18611/2013 filed by Harnam Singh under Section 340 Cr.P.C. and Crl.M.A.No.1623/2014 filed by Sh.Arvind Kumar Gupta, Advocate on behalf of M.P.Singh Sahni and Narinder Pal Kaur Sahni for correction in the orders dated 04.12.2006 and the judgment dated 30.05.2013 will be disposed of. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record.2. Harnam Singh (hereinafter referred as complainant) had filed several complaint / civil cases against M.P.Singh Sahni (to be referred as petitioner No.1) and h...
Tag this Judgment!Rakesh Kumar Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:02. d September, 2014 Date of Decision:10th September, 2014 % + CRL. M.C. 2067/2013 RAKESH KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Mukul Sharma, Advocate. versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION .....Respondent Through: Mr. Narender Mann, Special PP for CBI with Mr. Manoj Pant, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH JUDGMENT1 By this petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter after referred to as Cr.P.C.) read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner impugns the order dated 08.03.2013 passed by learned Special Judge (CBI), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi whereby the application dated 15.01.2013 filed on behalf of petitioner was dismissed.2. Shorn off unnecessary details, it is suffice to mention that the petitioner is a former member of the Indian Foreign Services, having retired on superannuation. At the relevant time, the petitioner was on deputation with the Indian C...
Tag this Judgment!Tata Motors Ltd. Vs. Legal Metrology Officer Weights and Measures Depa ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:10. h September, 2014 + CRL.M.C. 1148/2012 TATA MOTORS LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Aman Lekhi, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Laksh Khanna, Adv. versus LEGAL METROLOGY OFFICER WEIGHTS & MEASURES DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Varun Goswami, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH VED PRAKASH VAISH, J.(ORAL) 1. By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner assails order dated 26.09.2011 and 07.01.2012 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.2. In short, the facts of the present case are that the respondent filed a complaint for the offences punishable under Sections 18(1)/36(1) of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 read with Rule 6 of Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules 2011 against the petitioner on the allegations, inter alia, that the packages of Art Leather Steering Grip (Part No.886052401701) p...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Dass Gogia Vs. Shashi Prabha
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:20. 03.2014 Date of Decision:10. 09.2014 + RC REV No.293 of 2012 GOPAL DASS GOGIA Through: ...... Petitioner Mr. M.L. Sharma & Mr. Varun Nischal, Advs. versus SHASHI PRABHA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. R.S. Sahni & Mr. Anshumaan Sahni, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.1. This petition under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) impugns an eviction order dated 29.3.2012 passed in Eviction Case No.E-233/11. The respondents application under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act seeking eviction of the tenant from the tenanted premises, being one shop on the ground floor of property No.D-62, Kirti Nagar, Delhi, was allowed while the petitioner/tenants application under Section 25-B(4) of the Act seeking leave to defend was dismissed.2. The eviction-petitioner is an NRI settled in Kuwait. She wants to settle in India with her family and...
Tag this Judgment!State of Nct of Delhi Vs. Manas Kumar Pati
Court: Delhi
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 436/2014 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State. versus MANAS KUMAR PATI Represented by: ..... Respondent None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA ORDER1009.2014 % 1. The State seeks leave to appeal against the judgement dated May 13, 2014 acquitting Manas Kumar Pati for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.2. The investigation was set into motion on June 30, 2012 when HC Amar Pal was patrolling in the area of his beat and found one person lying in injured condition below the statue of Asaf Ali. Lot of blood had oozed out. He reported the matter to PS Darya Ganj which was recorded vide DD No.30A, Ex.PW-6/A. ASI Virender Kumar, PW-16 along with Constable Mohit and Constable Jai Ram reached the spot. ASI Virender Kumar inspected the body and found an injury mark on the left eyebrow of the deceased. The deceased was found in drunken c...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kusum Tyagi Vs. Sh. Satish Gupta
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % R.C.Rev. No.520/2012 10th September , 2014 SMT. KUSUM TYAGI Through: ......Petitioner Mr. C.Mohan Rao and Mr. Lokesh Kumar Sharma, Advocates. VERSUS SH. SATISH GUPTA Through: ...... Respondent Mr. K.N.Popli and Mr. Rohit Mehra, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition is filed under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short the Act) impugning the order of the Additional Rent Controller dated 26.5.2012 by which the leave to defend application has been granted to the respondent/tenant.2. One surprising fact is that today we are in September 2014 ie more than two years and three months after passing of the impugned order, but the petitioner has not even commenced leading her evidence. I may note that in Delhi eviction petitions are decided in about one and a half years or so and if the petitioner was sincere by now the main evicti...
Tag this Judgment!Sewa Ram and ors Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4123/2014 & Crl.M.A. No.14149/2014 SEWA RAM & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr. J.K. Singhal, Advocate. versus STATE & ANR Through ..... Respondents Mr. Amit Ahlawat, Additional Public Prosecutor. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No.0657/2014, registered at police station Narela under Section 420 IPC, and all proceedings emanating therefrom, on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties. The aforesaid FIR came to be lodged against the petitioners at the instance of the complainant Pradeep Kumar Mangal, who is arrayed as respondent No.2 herein, making serious allegations of cheating and forgery, along with conspiracy including, inter alia, manipulation and tampering of records of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC), Narela, Delhi with regard to the auctions that had been carried out ...
Tag this Judgment!Union Public Service Commission Vs. B.S.Negi and anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of order:10. 09.2014 % W.P.(C) 7652/2011 & C.M. No.17325/2011 UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Naresh Kaushik and Ms. Aditi Gupta, Advocates versus B. S. NEGI & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. G.D. Bhandari, Adv. for R-1 Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Adv. for R-2 . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The present Writ Petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail the order dated 05.09.2011 passed in OA No.2443/2009 by Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi (CAT/ Tribunal), whereby the Tribunal set aside the Order dated 21.11.2007 vide which 10% permanent cut in pension was imposed on the Respondent No.1. It was further directed by the Tribunal that the amount of pension so deducted be also refunded to the Respondent No.1.2. The respondent No.1 was working as Assistant in Union Public Service C...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. M.M. Knitwears Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sarl Texeurop
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order delivered on:10. h September, 2014 % + Ex.P.68/2011 & E.A.No.483/2011 M/S M.M.KNITWEARS PVT LTD ..... Decree Holder Through Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Adv. with Mr.Abhishek Chauhan, Adv. versus ..Judgment Debtor SARL TEXEUROP Through None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The decree holder has filed an execution petition for execution of the decree dated 17th November, 2005 passed in CS (OS) No.974/2002 seeking a decree for a sum of Rs. 91,21,289.83/- against judgment debtor.2. The decree holder in the execution petition has stated that the suit/claim of the plaintiff/decree holder against defendant No.1 i.e. Iran Air was rejected as time barred vide order dated 1st February, 2005 and the suit was decreed against defendant No.2/judgement debtor herein vide order dated 17th November, 2005 and a decree was accordingly drawn in favour of the decree holder. The judgement debtor has not paid the decreetal amount. Hence t...
Tag this Judgment!Rvakash Ganga Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:10. 09.2014 W.P.(C) 3572/2012 RVAKASH GANGA INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Mr Anil K. Aggarwal and Mr A.B. Singh. For the Respondent : Mr Sanjay Bhatt for R-2. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the Guidelines for Rooftop and Other Small Solar Power Plants Connected to Distribution Network (hereinafter referred to as the impugned guidelines) issued by the Central Government and has further sought a refund of `40 lacs which was recovered by respondent nos.1 and 2 by invoking the bank guarantees submitted by the petitioner.2. The principal ground urged by the petitioner is that the terms of the impugned guidelines cannot be construed as a valid contract within the provisions of Article 299 of the Constitution of India. It ...
Tag this Judgment!