Delhi Court August 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.
Aakaash Asthana Vs. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-2016
P.S. Teji, J. 1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sh. Aakaash Asthana for quashing of FIR No.1511/2015 dated 10.12.2015, under Sections 279/337 IPC registered at Police Station Saket on the basis of Memorandum of understanding executed between the petitioner and respondent nos. 2 to 6, namely, Smt. Sanjeeda Begum, Sh. Shafik Ahmad, Sh. Shahrukh Ahmad and Master Jameel Ahmad and Master Sameer Ahmad, both under the guardianship of respondent no. 2, on 10.02.2016 2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submitted that the respondent nos. 2 to 4 and respondent no. 2 also as guardian for respondent nos. 5 and 6 present in the Court have been identified to be the LRs of the deceased/victim in the FIR in question by SI Rajdeep Singh. 3. The factual matrix of the present case is that on 13.12.2015, the petitioner was going on his motorcycle Rajdoot bearing registration no. URW 4387, from Malviya Nagar metro station tow...
Aarti Manchanda Vs. Chander Shekhar Manchanda
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-2016
Pratibha Rani, J. (Oral) MAT.APP.(F.C.) 85/2015 1. The appellant/wife takes exception to the judgment and decree dated May 06, 2015 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, North District, Rohini whereby the marriage solemnized between the parties on July 27, 1996 has been dissolved by a decree of divorce on account of desertion by passing a decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(ib) of Hindu Marriage Act. 2. The respondent/husband filed a petition in the Family Court on August 28, 2010 praying therein for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion i.e. under Section 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of Hindu Marriage Act. However, while observing that the respondent/husband failed to prove cruelty, the prayer for dissolution of marriage on account of cruelty was declined but in view of the admitted position that the parties were living separately since February, 2008, and desertion by the appellant/wife being proved the marriage was dissolved. 3. The brief admitted facts are th...
Rahul Tongaria Vs. NCT of Delhi and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-2016
P.S. Teji, J. 1. By this petition filed under Section 439 of Cr. P.C., the petitioner seeks bail in a case registered as FIR No. 120/2016 under Section 307/34 of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Prasad Nagar, Delhi. 2. The present case has been registered at the instance of Naveen Girdhar, who is the complainant of the FIR in question. The complainant is engaged in the business of property dealing in the name and style of M/s. Hari Krishna Property Dealer. It is stated that the complainant had taken a house on security from the accused Leela Ram and after completion of agreed time period, the complainant asked Leela Ram to return his security money, but the same was not returned. The complainant made a call to the accused Leela Ram on 10.02.2016 at about 9.15 PM asking his money back, but the accused started misbehaving and started talking in filthy language on phone and also threatened to kill the complainant. 3. It is alleged that on the same day, the accused Leela Ram alongwith ...
Council of The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India Vs. Mahesh ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-2016
Pradeep Nandrajog, J. (Oral) 1. The reference made to this Court by the Institute of Chartered Accountants under Section 21(5) of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 has reached for hearing today. Whereas counsel as above appear for the Institute of Chartered Accountants, the first respondent who is the contesting respondent has not appeared. 2. With the able assistance of Sh.Rakesh Aggarwal, Advocate we have gone through the record commencing from the complaint received against the first respondent till the final recommendation made to this Court by the Council Members at the meeting held on September 20 and 21, 2010 recommending penalty of reprimand, contemplated by Section 21(6)(b) of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 to be inflicted. 3. One S.K.Garg made a complaint on January 31, 2006 against the respondent alleging that the complainant had engaged the services of the respondent to file his personal and his family members income tax returns and as and when called upon to pay pro...
Ravi Shankar and Another Vs. State and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-2016
P.S. Teji, J. 1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Sh. Ravi Shankar and Smt. Vijay Laxmi Sharma for quashing of FIR No.89/2011 dated 01.12.2011, under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Gulabi Bagh/ Pratap Bagh on the basis of the settlement arrived at between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, namely, Smt. Anita Sharma on 15.01.2015. 2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2, present in the Court has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question by her counsel. 3. The factual matrix of the present case is that the marriage was solemnized between petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 on 18.02.2011. The accused persons used to beat the complainant for bringing in insufficient dowry. It is the case of the complainant that the accused persons forced her to undergo an abortion when she was pregnant with accused no.1 s child. On...
The Indian Singers Rights Association Vs. Chapter 25 Bar and Restauran ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-2016
1. This is a suit by the Indian Singers Rights Association ( ISRA ) filedagainst Chapter 25 Bar and Restaurant operating at the Metropolitan Mall in Pushp Vihar, New Delhi. 2. The prayers in the suit are for a permanent injunction restraining the Defendant and all other acting for and on its behalf from communicating to the public the Plaintiff s repertoire comprising of Performer's performancesof all its members and that of the members of its sister societies which it is authorized to administer in India without paying royalties to and obtaining a clearance from the Plaintiff Society or doing any other that will infringe the Plaintiff s Performer's rights through any medium including but not limitedto Radio Stations, TV and usage by Mobile Companies and violating the Right to Receive Royalties (the R3) and their Performer's Rights. 3. The suit was filed along with an application for interim injunction. Summons was issued in the suit and notice in the application for stay on 18th Augus...
Farhan @ Sameer Vs. State NCT of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-2016
P.S. Teji, J. 1. By this petition filed under Section 439 of Cr. P.C., the petitioner seeks bail in a case registered as FIR No. 21/2013 under Section 364/302/120B/201/34 of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Ranhola, Delhi. 2. Petitioner is the husband of deceased Abhilasha. Marriage between them was solemnized on 19.03.2012. In the month of July 2012 a missing report was lodged by the petitioner with Police Station Ranhola, Delhi vide DD No.48A, dated 21.07.2012. On 20.07.2012 a female dead body was recovered near railway track and the inquest proceedings were conducted by Police Station Gabhana Aligarh, U.P. and the body of deceased was disposed of as unclaimed as the identity of body could not be established. 3. The present case was registered on 03.02.2013 on the complaint of Santosh Devi, who was mother of the deceased Abhilasha, wherein she suspected her son-in-law (petitioner herein) that he might have murdered her daughter and disposed the body somewhere. Investigation start...
Guru Teg Bahadur Institute of Technology and Others Vs. All India Coun ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-11-2016
G. Rohini, C.J. (Oral) 1. This appeal is preferred by the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.3684/2016 aggrieved by the dismissal of CM No.15761/2016 by the learned Single Judge by order dated 02.08.2016. 2. The appellant No.2/writ petitioner No.2 is Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Management Committee, stated to be a statutory body constituted under Delhi Sikh Gurudwaras Act, 1971 with the primary object of looking after Gurudwara properties in Delhi and also imparting education, etc. The appellant Nos.1 and 3/writ petitioner Nos.1 and 3 are the two Technical Institutions established by Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Management Committee (for short 'DSGM Committee'). 3. While appellant No.1 is an Institute which conducts Under-Graduate courses and operates from Rajouri Garden of Delhi, the appellant No.3 is an Institute which conducts Polytechnic courses and grants Diplomas in Engineering. It operates from Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. Both appellant Nos.1 and 3 are governed by the provisions of All India Council for T...
Oku Tech Private Limited Vs. Sangeet Agarwal and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-11-2016
IA No. 5853/2016 (for condonation of delay in filing the written statement) 1. This is an application filed by Defendants 1, 3 and 5 seeking condonation of delay in filing the written statement. 2. The application has been opposed by learned counsel for the Plaintiff by drawing attention of the Court to Section 16 read with the Schedule to The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 ( Act ) in terms of which the secondproviso to Order V Rule 1 as well as the proviso to Order VIII Rule 1 have both been substituted by the following proviso: Provided further that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the written statement on such other day, as may be specified by the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing and on payment of such costs as the Court deems fit, but which shall not be later than one hundred twenty days from the date of service of ...
Prashant Kumar Umrao and Another Vs. State and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-11-2016
P.S. Teji, J. 1. By this order, I shall dispose of both these applications. The present applications have been filed by the petitioners for cancellation of bail granted to the Kanhaiya Kumar, respondent no.2 in Crl.M.C. 1094/2016 and respondent no.1 in Crl.M.C. 1095/2016 (hereinafter referred to as respondent/accused ) vide order dated 02.03.2016 by this Court in FIR No.110/2016, under Sections 124-A/120-B/147/ 149/34 IPC, Police Station Vasant Kunj North. 2. Vide order dated 02.03.2016, this Court granted interim bail to the respondent/accused Kanhaiya Kumar for a period of six months. 3. The law regarding cancellation of bail is well settled. In the judgment of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Dolat Ram v. State of Haryana 1995 SCC (1) 349, it was observed that: Rejection of bail in a non-bailable case at the initial stage and the cancellation of bail so granted, have to be considered and dealt with on different basis. Very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an ...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »