Delhi Court February 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.
P K Kulshrestha Vs. Sarvesh Patni and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~53 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 10, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 508/2015 P K KULSHRESTHA Through: .....Petitioner Mr. Javed Ahmad and Mr. Abdul Wajid, Advocates versus SARVESH PATNI & ANR Through: .....Respondents Mr. Karan Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of criminal complaint No.59/2014, under Sections 138/142 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 titled Survesh Jain Patni v. Praveenn Kumar Kulshrestha and the summoning order of 24th November, 2014 is sought on merits in this petition. At the hearing, it was disclosed by learned counsel for petitioner that Notice under Section 251 of Cr.P.C. has not yet been framed and the next date before trial court is 18th March, 2015. At the outset, it is made clear that learned counsel for petitioner has not been heard on merits. Since petitioner has an alternate and efficacious remedy available to him to urge the pleas taken h...
Sh.Arun Kumar Sinha Vs. Cement Corporation of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.3247/1999 10th February, 2015 % SH.ARUN KUMAR SINHA Through: versus ..... Petitioner Mr.Ram Anugrah Pandey, Advocate. CEMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Puneet Taneja with Ms.Kopal Shrivastava, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner claims the relief that he should be promoted from the post of Deputy Manager (Electrical) to Manager (Electrical) from January, 1997 and that he should be paid the salary of a Manager when other persons have been paid in the pay-scale of a Manager from January, 1997. The relevant prayer clauses in the writ petition read as under:The humble petitioner therefore most respectfully prays that his Honble Court may most graciously be pleased to:(a) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commending the respond...
Mahesh Batra and Ors. Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 10, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 5149/2014 MAHESH BATRA & ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Raj Kamal and Mr. Gulshan Taneja, Advocates versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Parveen Bhati, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with SI Sandeep Mr. D.S. Yadav, Advocate with respondents No.2 & 3 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.281/2010, under Sections 287/304-A of IPC registered at police station Sarai Rohilla, Delhi is sought on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding/Settlement Agreement of 30th August, 2010 (Annexure P-2) and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR now stands cleared between the parties. Notice. Mr. Parveen Bhati, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and Mr. D.S. Yadav, Advocate, accepts CRL.M.C. 5149/2014 Page 1 notice on behalf of respondents No.2 an...
Meena and Anr. Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~58 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 10, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 518/2015 & Crl.M.A. 2017/2015 MEENA & ANR Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Vikas Yadav, Advocate versus BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD & ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State Mr. Chetan Kakkar and Ms. Varnika Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.570/2014, under Section 135 of The Indian Electricity Act, 2003 registered at police station Baba Haridass Nagar, Delhi is sought in this petition on the basis of No Dues Certificate of 14th October, 2014 issued by respondent No.1-complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question. Notice. Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice. CRL.M.C. 518/2015 Page 1 Mr. Chetan Kakkar, Advocate, appears on behalf of respondent No.2 and submits that the subject matter of this FIR stands amicably resolved ...
Sarvesh Chaturvedi and Anr. Vs. State Nct of Delhi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:10. h February, 2015 + CRL.REV.P. 31/2013 SARVESH CHATURVEDI & ANR. ..... Petitioner Through: Ms Sangita Bhayana, Advocate versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondent Through: Ms Fizani Hussain, APP for State/R-1 Mr Manish Kumar, Advocate for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Revisional jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section u/s 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the judgment dated 26th October, 2012 passed by Learned District and Additional Sessions Judge, In-charge (South & South East), Saket, New Delhi whereby the judgment passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court dated 24th October, 2011 acquitting the accused in case FIR3462006 PS Badarpur u/s 506/509 IPC was upheld.2. Petitioner No.2 is the daughter of petitioner No.1. They were residing in the neighbourhood of respo...
Saurabh Sehgal and Ors. Vs. State and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~50 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 10, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 501/2015 SAURABH SEHGAL & ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr.R. K. Bachchan, Advocate versus STATE & ANR Through: .....Respondents Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Bhagat Singh Mr.R.B. Singh, Advocate with respondents No.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.335/2013, under Sections 498-A/406 of IPC registered at police station Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 26th May, 2014 arrived at Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini Courts, Delhi (Annexure P-3). Notice. Ms. Nishi Jain, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and Mr. R. B. Singh, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState submits CRL.M.C. 501/2015 Page 1 that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant o...
Mithu Rai Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:10. h February, 2015 + CRL.A. 244/2011 MITHU RAI Through: ..... Appellant Mr.D.B.Yadav, Advocate versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Ms.Fizani Hussain, APP for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 24.09.2010 and order on sentence dated 11.10.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohini, Delhi in Session Case No.191/09 arising out of FIR No.447/07, P.S.Adarsh Nagar wherein the appellant was convicted u/s 376(2)(f) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as IPC) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 60 days. He was granted benefit of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. The victim in the instant case is a minor child aged about 5 years at the time of incident, who was subjected to rape by the accus...
Shiv Kumar and Anr. Vs. State Nct of Delhi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 10, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 1214/2013 & Crl.M.A. 3747/2013 SHIV KUMAR & ANR. Through: .....Petitioners Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vinod Diwakar, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with SI Sonu Ram Ms. Alka Singh, Advocate with respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.61/2013, under Sections 420/406/506 of IPC registered at police station Vijay Vihar, Outer District, Delhi is sought on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding/Settlement Agreement of 30th June, 2010 (Annexure-P-2) and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR now stands cleared between the parties. Notice. Mr. Vinod Diwakar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and Ms. Alka Singh, Advocate, accepts CRL.M.C. 1214/2013 Page 1 notice on behalf of respondent...
Gyan Parkash and Ors. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY10 2015. + CRL.REV.P. 80/2015 & Crl.M.A.Nos.2012/2015 and 2013/2015 GYAN PARKASH & ORS. Through : ..... Petitioners Mr.S.Khan with Ms.Sushmita Das and Ms.Jyoti, Advocates. VERSUS STATE Through : ..... Respondent Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP SI Babu Lal, PS R.K.Puram. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Present revision petition has been preferred to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated 24.12.2014 of learned Additional Sessions Judge by which charge under Sections 498A/304B/406/34 IPC was ordered to be framed against the petitioners.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that there was no material before the learned Trial Court to proceed against the petitioners for the commission of aforesaid offences. In the suicide note recovered at the spot, the victim did not held anyone responsible for her death. Statements given by the witnesses are highly improbable and selfcontradictory. Allegat...
Smt Rama Goel Vs. Mr. Moti Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on :10. h February, 2015 % + CS (OS) No.2008/2009 & I.A. No.667/2013, I.A. No.668/2013 & I.A. No.669/2013. SMT RAMA GOEL Through .....Plaintiff Mr. Udayan Jain, Adv. with Mr. Nalin Kumar Jain, Adv. versus MR. MOTI GUPTA Through ..Defendant Mr. Alok Sinha, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. By way of this order I propose to decide the following applications : i) I.A. No.667/2013 (Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC) for amendment of the plaint to bring on record the subsequent events which have taken place post commencement of the trial and to seek additional reliefs of damages and compensation. ii) I.A. No.668/2013 (Order 7 Rule 14(3) read with Section 151 CPC) for taking on record the additional documents which have come into existence subsequent to the commencement of the trial. iii) I.A. No.669/2013 for admitting the additional documents on record and permitting the re-examination of...
- ‹ Prev
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- Next ›
- Last »