Delhi Court January 2015 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.
Mohd Suleman@salman and Ors. Vs. State and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: January 28, 2015 (i) + CRL.M.C. 4687/2014 MOHD SOHAIL & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Shantanu Rastogi, Advocate with petitioners in person versus STATE GOVT OF NCT DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1State with Inspector Rajender Respondents No.1 to 6 in person (ii) + CRL.M.C. 4072/2014 MOHD SULEMAN @ SALMAN & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Shantanu Rastogi, Advocate with petitioners in person versus STATE & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1State with SI Usman Ali Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Crl.M.C.No.4687/2014 Crl.M.C.No.4072/2014 Page 1 JUDGMENT (ORAL) % In the above captioned two petitions, quashing of FIR No.188/2014, under Sections 427/323/452/34 of the IPC [in Crl. M.C. No.4687/2014]. & FIR No.189/2014, under Sections 323/324/506/34 of the IPC ...
Dreamland Promoters and Consultants Pvt Ltd Vs. State and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: January 28, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 3660/2014 DREAMLAND PROMOTERS & CONSULTANTS PVT LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Gursharan Sharma, Advocate versus STATE & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State with SI Babu Lal Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.201/2012, under Section 420/34 of the IPC, registered at police station Sarita Vihar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Settlement-Agreement of 7th September, 2013 (Annexure-P-1) and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR now stands cleared between the parties. Notice. Mr. Navin Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and he has been identified to be so by SI Babu Lal, Invest...
National Front of Indian Trade Unions (Dhn) Vs. Union of India and Anr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-2015
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6423/2013 & CM No.14005/2013 NATIONAL FRONT OF INDIAN TRADE UNIONS (DHN) ..... Petitioner Through: Mr A.K. Bajpai & Mr Praveen Gupta, Advs. versus % UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr Dev P. Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr M.K. Chaudhary, Dy. Chief Labour Commissioner. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER2801.2015 1. This is a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner/union is, essentially, aggrieved by the fact that the Standing Committee has taken a decision to decline its claim for verification and consequent recognition as a central trade union, based on reasons, which according to the petitioner, are unsustainable. 1.1 It is in this connection, that the petitioner/union has impugned the minutes of meeting of the Standing Committee dated 21.06.2013 and 22.07.2013, and the letter of the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (C) dated 26.08.2013.2. Briefly, the broad facts as culled from ...
Om Parkash and Ors. Vs. State and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: January 28, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 4768/2013 OM PARKASH AND ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Jitendera Sethi & Mr. Hemendra Jailiya, Advocates versus STATE AND ORS. Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1State with SI Vishwanath Mr. Akhil Batra, Advocate for respondents No.2 & 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.344/2009, under Sections 356/332/506/186/34 of the IPC, registered at police station Burari, Delhi is sought on the basis of Settlement Deed of 8th November, 2013 and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR now stands cleared between the parties. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState submits that respondents No.2 & 3, present in the Court, are complainants of the FIR in question and they have been identified to be so by their counsel as well as by SI Vishwanath, Investigating O...
Shanshah Vs. Idrish
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-2015
$~9 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RC.REV. 387/2011 Decided on:28. h January, 2015 % SHANSHAH Through : ..... Petitioner Ms. Padmini Gupta, Adv. with petitioner in person. versus IDRISH Through : ..... Respondent Mr. Dinesh Garg and Mr.Khalid Jamal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. Aggrieved by the order dated 12.07.2001 declining to grant leave to defend to the petitioner in the eviction petition filed under Section 14(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short the DRC Act), the petitioner prefers the present petition.2. Since the present petition was dismissed for non-prosecution twice and thereafter restored in the interregnum, the respondent took possession of the tenanted premises in execution proceedings. Thus, vide order dated 17.07.2012, this Court noted that the petition will be disposed of on merits and till further orders, the respondent was directed not to create any third party interest of any kind in the suit premise...
Ashwani Kumar and Ors. Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: January 28, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 318/2015 ASHWANI KUMAR & ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Gaurav Kapoor, Advocate versus STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Karan Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with Inspector Yash Pal Singh Mr. Vijay Sachdeva, Advocate for respondent No.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.08/2013, under Sections 498-A/406 of IPC registered at police station Swaroop Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit of respondent No.2. Notice. Mr. Karan Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and Mr. Vijay Sachdeva, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and she has been identified to be so by her counsel CRL.M.C. ...
Cit Vs. Transceivers India Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-2015
$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:28. 01.2015 + ITA12242011 CIT ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rohit Madan, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus TRANSCEIVERS INDIA LTD ..... Respondent Through: Dr. Rakesh Gupta with Mr. Mukul Mathur, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereafter referred to as ITAT) dated 11.02.2011 upholding the Appellate Commissioners direction to delete the penalty imposed upon the assessee, for furnishing inaccurate particulars under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as Act).2. The brief facts - for the purposes of the present appeal - are that for Assessment Year (AY) 2001-02, the assessee, which used to supply technical equipments to Government agencies, claimed certain expenditure of Rs.69,67,886/- as commission to one M/s Simoco and ITA12242011 Page 1...
Shyam Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: + 28th January, 2015 CRL.A. 305/2014 SHYAM Through: ..... Appellant Ms Alpana Pandey, Adv. (DHCLSC) versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr O.P. Saxena, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State along with SI Lichhman, P.S. South Rohini. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Appellant Shyam impugns the judgment dated 27.02.2013 and order on sentence dated 28.02.2013 in case FIR No.61/2011, P.S. South Rohini vide which he was convicted for offence u/s 394 IPC and was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 3 years and was also directed to pay fine of Rs.2000/-, in default to undergo SI for 3 months.2. Prosecution case lies in a narrow compass. On 22.03.2011, complainant Yudhvir Singh (PW3) was roaming near CAW Cell, Sector 3 Rohini along with his two nephews aged about 1 year and 5 years old. At about 07.20 p.m, two boys aged about 20-25 years started walking very closely near to his nephew Pra...
State ( Govt of Nct of Delhi) Vs. Amarjeet Singh and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-2015
$~ 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 29/2015 % Judgment dated 28.01.2015 STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Firoz Khan Ghazi, APP for State versus AMARJEET SINGH & ORS Through ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) CRL.M.A. 848/2015 (EXEMPTION) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.2. Application stands disposed of. CRL.L.P. 29/2015 3. The present leave to appeal arises out of a judgment dated 29.8.2014 and order on sentence dated 30.9.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, by which the respondents were convicted under Section 308/34 IPC and absolved from the offence under Section 307/34 IPC and subsequently released them on probation of good conduct.4. The case of the prosecution, as noticed by the learned trial Court is as under:1. Briefly facts of the case are that on receiving a DD No.22A, 23A and 24A, SI K.L. Yadav alongwith Ct. Daya Singh ...
M/S Minda Nexgentech Limited Vs. Tushar Kanti Ghosh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 748/2014 Decided on :28. 01.2015 IN THE MATTER OF: M/S MINDA NEXGENTECH LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Chander Shekhar Yadav, Advocate with Mr. Narinder Kumar, Advocate versus TUSHAR KANTI GHOSH ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Bimal Chakrabarti, Advocate CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The plaintiff has instituted the present suit under Order XXXVII of the CPC, praying inter alia for a decree of a sum of `24,45,900.16, against the defendant, alongwith interest thereon.2. On 14.03.2014, summons were issued to the defendant in the prescribed format. As per the records, the defendant, who is a resident of Burdwan, West Bengal, was served with the summons in the suit on 16.06.2014. However, the defendant did not file the memo of appearance within the prescribed period of ten days. Instead, he filed a written statement on 08.07.2014. On 12.09.2014, when counsel for the defendant had appeared before the learned...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »