Delhi Court July 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.
Muzaffar Ali @ Mulla Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-07-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:07. 7.2015 Crl. Appeal No.197/2013 MUZAFFAR ALI @ MULLA Appellant Through: Mr.Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Advocate. Versus STATE Through: .Respondent Mr.Pramod Saxena, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(oral) 1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 31.10.2012 and 07.11.2012 respectively wherein the appellant had been convicted under Sections 376/506 of the IPC. He has been sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- for the offence under Section 376 of the IPC. For his second conviction he had been sentenced to undergo RI for 1 month. The sentences were to run concurrently.2. The version of the prosecution unfolded in the testimony of prosecutrix (PW-7) is that on the fateful day i.e. on 01.12.2010 at about 5.00 p.m. when her parents had gone for work and she alone and watching T.V. in the house, the appellant Muzaffar @ ...
Sobhnath Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-07-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on :03. 07.2015 Judgment delivered on :07. 07.2015 Crl. Appeal No.1574/2011 SOBHNATH Appellant Through: Versus Mr. Sumeet Verma, Adv. STATE Through: .Respondent Mr. O.P. Saxena, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 12.07.2011 and 13.07.2011 respectively wherein the appellant Sobhnath stood convicted under Sections 376 (2) (f)/506 (I) of the IPC. He had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 10 years for the graver offence under Section 376 (2)(f) of the IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for a period of 2 months. For the offence under Section 506 (I) of the IPC, he had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 6 months. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. The victim was a minor girl aged about 9 years and unfortunately was the grand...
Jagjiwan Co-Opp. Group Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-07-2015
$~73 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:07. 07.2015 W.P.(C) 2363/2015 & CM No.4246/2015 JAGJIWAN CO-OPP. GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. .... Petitioner Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : For the Respondents : Mr P.V. Kapoor, Sr Advocate with Mr S.K. Gupta, Mr Manish Gupta, Mr Abhinav Gupta and Mr R.K. Gupta, Advocates. Mr Prasanta Varma and Mr Anirudh Shukla, Advocates for respondent No.1. Mr Siddharth Panda with Mr Priyabrat Sahu, Advocates for respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4. Mr Dhanesh Relan, Mr Arush Bhandari and Ms Akshita Manocha, Advocates for respondent No.5. Ms Arti Bansal with Ms Rishika Katyal, Advocates for respondent No.6. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The counter affidavit handed over by Mr Panda on behalf of respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner do...
Balbir Verma Vs. The Indian Institute of Architects and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-07-2015
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:7. h July, 2015 % + W.P.(C) No.6422/2015, CM No.11695/2015 (for stay) & CM No.11696/2015 (for exemption) BALBIR VERMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. D. Verma and Ms. Arpana Iyer, Advs. Versus THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ripu Daman Bhadwaj, CGSC with Mr. T.P. Singh, Adv. for R-2. CORAM:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The petition impugns the decision of the respondent no.1 The Indian Institute of Architects (IIA) declaring the nomination filed by the petitioner for election to the Council of Architecture for the term 2015-2018 as invalid/ineligible and seeks a direction to the respondent no.1 IIA to permit the petitioner to contest the said election.2. It is the case of the petitioner:(i) that the term of office of an elected member of the Council of Architecture (the Council), as per Section 6(1) of The Architects Act, 1972 (the Act) is of three years from the date of his elec...
Paminder Gujral and Ors. Vs. Kirnajit Gujral and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:10. h April, 2015 Judgment Delivered on:06. h July, 2015 % + + + FAO(OS) 8/2015 & CM No.324/2015 FAO(OS) 10/2015 & CM No.328/2015 FAO(OS) 13/2015 & CM Nos.335/2015, 336/2015 PAMINDER GUJRAL & ORS. .....Appellants versus KIRNAJIT GUJRAL & ANR. .....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellants: Mr Y.P. Narula, Senior Advocate with Mr Abhey Narula, Advocate. For Respondent No.1: Mr Manoj Khanna with Mr Abhimanyu Kalsy, Advocates for respondent No.1. For Respondent No.2: Ms Sumedha Dua CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J1 These appeals arise out of a common order dated 31.10.2014, whereby the transfer petitions filed by the appellants under Section 24 =============================================================== of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) have been dismissed.2. The controversy, at the present...
Sentini Bio Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/S. Allied Blender and Distillers ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : May 26, 2015 Judgment Delivered on : July 06, 2015 + FAO (OS) 368/2014 SHREE NATH HERITAGE LIQUOR PVT. LTD. .Appellant Represented by: Mr.Jayant Tripathi, Advocate with Mr.Sumit Rajput, Advocate versus M/S. ALLIED BLENDER & DISTILLERS PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Represented by: Mr.Pravin Anand, Advocate with Mr.Shrawan Chopra, Advocate, Ms.Abhilasha Nautiyal, Advocate and Mr.Vibhav Mithal, Advocate FAO (OS) 493/2014 SENTINI BIO PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. .Appellant Represented by: Mr.Gopal Subramaniam, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Gagan Gupta, Advocate versus M/S. ALLIED BLENDER & DISTILLERS PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Represented by: Mr.Pravin Anand, Advocate with Mr.Shrawan Chopra, Advocate, Ms.Abhilasha Nautiyal, Advocate and Mr.Vibhav Mithal, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Shree Nath Heritage Liquor Pvt. Ltd. (the appellant of FAO (OS) No.368/2014)...
Anita Devi Vs. Indian Oil Corporation and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on :06. 04.2015 Judgment delivered on:06. 07.2015 + WP(C) 6870/2012 ANITA DEVI ..... Petitioner Versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION & ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner: Mr T.S.R. Venkatramana, Advocate For the Respondents: Ms Mala Narayan & Ms Vridhika Mayar, Advocates for R- 1 & 2. Mr Atul Bandhu, Advocate for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER,J1 This writ petition is directed against two orders passed by respondent No.1 and 2. Respondent No.l and 2, in effect, represent the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (hereafter referred to as IOCL). The two orders which are impugned are: order dated 30.11.2010 and 11.03.2011. THE SCOPE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDERS & THEIR EFFECT11 By virtue of order dated 30.11.2010, IOCL communicated to the petitioner, i.e., Ms Anita Devi (who I shall be referring to hereon as Anita Devi-I that she had been de-empanelled. The facts, which will ...
Om Prakash Sharma Vs. Onida Savak Ltd. and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 01, 2015 Judgment Delivered on: July 06 , 2015 % + LPA6162008 OM PRAKASH SHARMA Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Vinay Sabharwal and Ms.Neha Sabharwal, Advs. versus ONIDA SAVAK LTD. AND ANR. Represented by: ..... Respondent None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. The appellant Om Prakash Sharma while working with the respondent No.1 Onida Savak Ltd. (in short the Onida) as a supervisor was transferred from Delhi office to Guwahati. Om Prakash wrote letters to the management of Onida on December 18 and 19, 1996 requesting not to transfer his services to Guwahati taking the plea that his wife was unwell and he would not be able to go to Guwahati. Management of Onida declined the request to withdraw the transfer order vide its letter dated December 21, 1996. It is the case of Om Prakash that on December 22, 1996 he fell ill and remained under treatment till Ja...
Roche Products (India) Pvt Ltd and Ors Vs. Drugs Controller General of ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Order delivered on: July 06, 2015 I.A. Nos.2371/2014, 2988/2014, 2990/2014, 4649/2014, 4677/2014, 5956/2014, 9155/2014, 9157/2014, 14533/2014, 14534/2014, 791/2015, 11224/2015, 11225/2015, 12830/2015, 12831/2015, 12862/2015 & CCP(O) No.69/2015 in CS(OS) No.355/2014 ROCHE PRODUCTS (INDIA) PVT LTD & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Adv. and Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Ms.Niti Dixit, Mr.Darpan Wadhwa, Mr.N.Mahavir, Ms.Samiksha Godiyal, Mr.Anugrah Robin Frey and Ms. Roshni Namboodiry, Advs. versus DRUGS CONTROLLER GENERAL OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr.Amit Mahajan, CGSC and Mr.Krishanu Barhua, Advs. for D-1. Dr.Abhishek M. Singhvi, Sr. Adv. & Mrs.Pratibha M. Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Vijay K. Sondhi, Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Mr.Anirban Bhattacharya, Mr.Mayank Grover, Ms.Cauveri Birbal, Mr.Anshul Sehgal, Mr.Arjun Sawhney and Ms. Suhasini Raina, Advs. for D-2. Mr.Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. with Ms.Gayat...
Ntpc Vs. Hindustan Construction Company Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:20. h April, 2015 Judgment Delivered on:06. h July, 2015 % + FAO(OS) 154/2015 & EFA (OS) 10/2015 NTPC .....Appellant Versus HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellants: For the Respondent: Mr Tushar Mehta, ASG, with Mr Tarkeshwar Nath and Mr Param Kumar Mishra, Advocates Mr Dayan Krishnan, Sr Advocate with Mr Rishi Agrawala, Advocate CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J1 FAO(OS) 154/2015 is an appeal impugning the order dated 03.02.2015 in OMP No.626/2014 whereby the learned Single Judge relying on the order passed in Execution Petition No.151/2014 has held that the challenge in the objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the =============================================================== Act) petition registered as OMP No.626/2014 w...
- ‹ Prev
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- Next ›
- Last »