Delhi Court December 2016 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.
Shyam Murti Sharma vs.state of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2016
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : OCTOBER25 2016 DECIDED ON : DECEMBER21 2016 CRL.A.1364/2014 + SHYAM MURTI SHARMA ..... Appellant. Through : Mr.Vishal Raj Sehijpal, Advocate. VERSUS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG Through : Mr.Amit Gupta, APP. ..... Respondent S.P.GARG, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is a judgment dated 06.05.2014 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.arising out of FIR No.registered at Police Station Dhaula Kuan by which the appellant-Shyam Murti Sharma was held guilty for committing offence under Section 392 read with Section 397 IPC. By an order dated 16.05.2014, he was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years with fine `10,000/- under Section 3IPC and Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with fine `5,000/- under Section 397 IPC. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as set up in the charge-sheet was that on 03.04.2010 at around 12.45 ...
Birpal Singh vs.delhi Transport Corporation & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2016
$~1 * + BIRPAL SINGH IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 11891/2016 Date of decision:21. t December, 2016 Through Mr. Kishore Kumar Patil, Advocates. ....... Petitioner versus DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION & ORS. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Rizwan, Advocate. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) Having heard the counsel for the petitioner-Birpal Singh, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.2. The petitioner was working as a Driver in respondent No.1-Delhi Transport Corporation and had retired on 31st January, 2012 after attaining the age of 55 years. As per policy dated 4-7th October, 1963, amended vide letter dated 30th June, 1998, it was decided by the respondent-Corporation that Drivers could be allowed to work up to the age of 60 years, subject to medical fitness. W.P. (C) 11891/2016 Page 1 of 4 3. The petitioner was examined by a medical b...
Sh. Ram Mehar vs.food Corporation of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P. (C) No.7635/2000 + % SH. RAM MEHAR21t December, 2016 Through: Dr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Advocate. versus ........ Petitioner FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues one very limited issue in this writ petition which is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner for setting aside the orders passed by the departmental authorities, being the order of the disciplinary authority dated 23/24.6.1993 and the order of the appellate authority dated 28.6.1999.2. The limited issue which is argued is that whereas the disciplinary authority vide its order dated 23/24.6.1993 imposed the penalty of compulsory retirement from services of the petitioner with the respondent no.1/Food Corporation of India/employer, the appellate aut...
Shailendra Dania and Ors. Vs.dusib
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2016
* + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:22. 07.2016 Pronounced on:21. 12.2016 LPA2662013, C.M. APPL.15531/2013 & 2812/2016 SHAILENDRA DANIA AND ORS. DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENT BOARD AND ORS. ....Respondents Appellants Versus LPA6052013 DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENT BOARD AND ANR. Appellants Versus DELHI (SLUMS) SC/ST ENGINEERS ASSOCATION (REGD) AND ORS. ....Respondents Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Pramod Gupta, Advocate, for petitioner in LPA2662013. Sh. Parvinder Chauhan, Advocate, DUSIB. Sh. R.R. Kishore, Advocate, for Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 in LPA2662013 and for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 in LPA6052013. for CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. These appeals impugn the common judgment and order of a learned Single Judge delivered on 21.12.2012, allowing the writ petition of the Respondent Nos. 2-6 (hereafter called "the writ petitioners" or "contesting respondents"). LPA2...
Rama Sinha vs.state Thr. Cbi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2016
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:21. t December, 2016 CRL.M.C. 3557/2016 and Crl. M.A. No.15030/2016 RAMA SINHA ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Yashank Adhiyaru, Sr. versus Advocate with Mr. Sibo Shankar Mishra and Mr. Niranjan Sahu, Advocates. STATE THR. CBI ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Anupam S. Sharma, Spl. P.P. with Mr. Vipul Sharma, Mr. Ankit Dhawan and Mr. Sachin Gautam, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. By the present petition, the petitioner had sought setting aside of the orders dated 14th September, 2016 and 15th September, 2016 summoning the petitioner as the Court witness and directions to the learned Trial Court to summon the witnesses cited by the petitioner as Court witnesses and to examine them before recording the statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.2. A brief history of litigation. The husband of the petitioner Dr. A.K. Sinha is facing trial in RC21986 under Section 5(2) read wi...
M/S Mahavir Transmission Udyog Pvt. Ltd vs.m/s Real Power Utility & Or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2016
* % + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:10.11.2016 Decided on:21. 12.2016 CS(COMM) 657/2016 M/S MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION UDYOG PVT. LTD ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Vaibhav Jain, Advocate. versus M/S REAL POWER UTILITY & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT The present suit has been filed for recovery of sum of ` 2,35,08,765/- (Rupees Two Crore Thirty Five Lacs Eight Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Five Only) along with the interest. It is submitted that plaintiff is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office in Delhi and is involved in the manufacturing of ACSR conductors for the past more than 10 years and is enjoying a good reputation in the market for manufacture of ACSR conductors. CS (COMM) 657/2016 Page 1 2. Sh. Akshat Jain is the Director of the Plaintiff Company and is fully conversant with the facts of the present case and is a duly authorized person of the company to repre...
Abhishek Garg vs.the Union of India & Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % ABHISHEK GARG W.P.(C) 11947/2016 21st December, 2016 Through: versus THE UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS ........ Petitioner... Petitioner in person. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Kamal Kant Jha, Adv. for R-1. Ms. Eshita Baruah, Adv. for Mr. Gaurang Kant, Adv. for R-2 to 4. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1.... Petitioner appears in person. He argues that the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India be entertained by this Court. He places reliance upon the order dated 28.11.2016 of the Supreme Court annexed as Annexure P-14 to the writ petition and which reads as under:-"The petitioner, who is appearing in person, seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach the High Court. Permission, as sought for, is granted. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. W.P.(C) No.11947/2016 Page 1 of 3 2.... Petitioner ...
Ramesh Chander vs.state of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2016
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. No.526/2002 Date of Decision : December 21st, 2016 RAMESH CHANDER ..... PETITIONER Through Mr.S.K. Grover, Adv. versus STATE OF DELHI ..... RESPONDENT Through Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, APP for the State. PSI Arun Kumar, PS Tilak Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J1 Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 11.07.2002 convicting the appellant finding him guilty under Section 304B IPC and order on sentence dated 12.07.2002 vide which the appellant was sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 304B IPC, the present appeal has been preferred.2. The factual matrix emerges from the record is that the FIR No.403.1987, under Section 304B/34 IPC, Police Station Tilak Nagar was registered on the basis of statement made by the complainant Naresh Kumar. He had stated that the marriage of his sister Renu was solemnised with the appellant Ramesh Chander on Crl.A. No.526/2002 Page 1 of 14 1...
Union of India and Ors vs.amit Rathee and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2016
$~10-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 8311/2016 Date of decision:21. t December, 2016 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Kirtiman Singh and Mr. Pranav Agrawal, Advocates. AMIT RATHEE AND ORS versus ..... Respondent Through Mr. Saurabh Chadda, Advocate for Mr. Ajesh Luthra, Advocate. W.P.(C) 8330/2016 UOI AND ORS Through Mr. Kirtiman Singh and Mr. Pranav Agrawal, Advocates. versus ........ Petitioner GOVIND AND ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr. Saurabh Chadda, Advocate for Mr. Ajesh Luthra, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA * + SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): The Union of India has filed the present writ petition, impugning the order dated 8.4.2016, whereby the OA filed by the respondents was allowed, based on the decision rendered by the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in OA No.478/2015 titled Kaustubha Devang Pandya & 7 Ors. Versus Union of India & Ors. The impugned order, in fact, does not contain any...
State vs.mohit
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-2016
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:21. t December, 2015 + CRL.P. 409/2015 & Crl.M.A. 7212/2015 STATE MOHIT Through: Ms. Aasha Tiwari, APP ..... Appellant versus Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA SANJIV KHANNA, J (ORAL) 1. This leave to appeal by the State is belated and an application for condoning delay of 14 days in filing has been moved. However, before issuing notice on the said application, we have deemed it appropriate to examine the impugned judgment on merits.2. The judgment under challenge dated 12.12.2014 passed by Ms. Illa Rawat, Additional Sessions Judge, North-West-1, Rohini, Delhi, acquits the respondent Mohit from the charges under Sections 366/376(i)/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC for short) and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.3. On the question of age of the prosecutrix, the prosecution had relied upon the school records, Ex.PW-...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »