Court : Delhi
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:10. h APRIL, 2019 Judgment Pronounced on :9. h JULY, 2019 + W.P.(C) 8241/2013 MEERA SAHNI & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Anil K. Sapra, Senior Advocate with Mr. B.S. Maan & Ms.Akanksha Choudhary, Advocates GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Senior Advocate with Mr.Yeeshu Jain & Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Standing Counsels with Mr.Govind Kumar, Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Mr.Sunil Kumar Jha, Mr.Kushal Tater, Mr.M.S.Akhtar, Mr.Shashi Kant Maurya & Mr.Sharf Habibullah, Advocates for LAC & L&B. Mr. Ajay Verma, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Ishaan Verma, Advocate for the DDA. Raj CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO G.S.SISTANI, J.1.... Petitioners have filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The following reliefs were sought: A. Issue a writ(s), order(s) or direction(s) in the nature of prohibitio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS (OS) No. 2221/2012 Date of Decision:16. 04.2013 HAVELS INDIA LTD. ....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv with Ms. Ferida Satarawala, Mr. Raghavendra M. Bajaj, Advs. Versus ELECTRIUM SALES LTD. ...Defendant Through: Mr. Arvind Nigam, Sr. Adv, with Mr. Atul Sharma, Mr. Milanka Chaudhury, Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA M.L. MEHTA, J.I.A. 16236/2012 (Under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Section 9 of CPC) and IA No.21237/2012 (Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996) 1. Both these applications are filed by the defendants. The background facts leading to the filing of these applications by the defendant are thus:2. The plaintiff and Electrium (U.K.) had been having business dealings in terms of a Supply Agreement executed between them on September 30, 2002. The said agreement is still subsisting. The defendant, which is a co-subsidiary of Electrium (U.K.), has filed a Request for Arbitrati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... in the evidence. the learned trial judge has observed that the evidence of vinod sahani is that the incident took place at a distance of about 100 ft from the gandhi statute, where the meeting was held. what he wanted to convey was that hence there must have been light at the place of crl.a.no.1284/2015 page 195 ..... this statement, the high court observed that the accused had stated that he had kept them (drums) there . we have perused the original record of the statement which is in hindi, and we are of opinion that by no stretching of the words this statement can be so read or construed as has been done by the high court. the copy ..... entry in the 13. daily diary a in regard to rukka ex. pw1/a. the entry on being translated into english reads as follows:-" at this time a writing in hindi written and signed by jagbir singh, s.i. containing the statement of s. balak singh, s/o lachhman singh, r/o qr. no.8b, jangpura extension, has been received at .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % CRL.REF.No.1/2016 Reserved on :28. h February 2017 Date of decision :17. h October 2017 DAYAWATI Through: Mr. Gautam Pal, Adv. for the ........ Petitioner versus complainant YOGESH KUMAR GOSAIN ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Digpaul, Adv. for the respondent Mr. J.P. Sengh, Sr. Adv., Ms. Veena Ralli alongwith Mr. Ravin Kapur and Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Advs. as Amici Curiae. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE1 The legal permissibility of referring a complaint cases under Section 138 of the NI Act for amicable settlement through mediation; procedure to be followed upon settlement and the legal implications of breach of the mediation settlement is the subject matter of this judgment. Shri Bharat Chugh, as the concerned Metropolitan Crl.Ref.No.1/2016 Page 1 of 89 Magistrate (NI Act) Central - 01/THC/ Delhi, when seized of Complaint Case Nos.519662/2016 and 5...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... india to invoke arbitration against gmr energy. relying upon the decisions reported as 2010 (5) scc306indowind energy ltd. vs. wescare (india) ltd., 2017 scconline del 8345 sudhir gopi vs. indira gandhi national open university and 2014 (9) scc407balwant rai saluja & anr. vs. air india ltd. & ors. it is contended that the principle of alter ego as being sought to be invoked .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... (pw1). ii) shri kashmiri lal chugh, s/o shri b.r. chugh, assistant surveyor of works, competent authority branch, land and building department, delhi administration (pw2). iii) shri surjit lal gandhi, s/o shri parma nand, asstistant in the office of registrar of companies (pw3). iv) shri chandra mohan sharma/plaintiff no.2 (pw4). v) shri m.c. sharma, s/o .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 292/2013 Judgment delivered on:02. 05.2013 TEJ KISHAN SADHU Through: ... Petitioner Mr. U.U. Lalit, Senior Advocate, Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate, Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Senior Advocate, Mr. Ashok Bhasin, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mohit Mathur, Mr. Amish Dabur, Mr. Rajiv Goel and Mr. Devinder Dadha, Advocates Versus STATE & ANR. Through: .. Respondents Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for State Mr. Harish Salve, Senior Advocate with Ms. Pratibha M. Singh, Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, Mr. Gurpreet Singh and Mr. Mudit Jain, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR1) By this order I shall decide the present petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482, 483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C in short) read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for setting aside the order dated 15.01.2013 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate.2) The petitioner has challenged the correctness and legality ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... ltd and indraprastha power generation company ltd. aravali by a contract dated 15th january, 2008 awarded alstom a turnkey project for erection and commissioning of power transformer package for indira gandhi super thermal power project (igstpp), jhajjhar in the aravalli super thermal power project.4. on 6th january, 2009, repm sent a letter to alstom along with a brief introduction of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... with mr. ashok panigrahi, mr. surajit bhaduri & ms. aakashi lodha, advocates for lic. + w.p.(c) 3983/2016 wp(c)184/2007 & connected matters page 3 of 90 madan lal gandhi and ors. ........ petitioners through mr. jay savla & mr. bharat aggarwal, advocates. versus union of india and ors. ........ respondents through mr. ripu daman bhardwaj, cgsc, mr.t.p. singh & ms. abha ..... division bench of the rajasthan high court, order of this court dated 30th january, 2013 and decision of the punjab & haryana high court dated 9th november, 2012 in madan lal gandhi & others v. union of india & others, cwp163462010 (again relying upon the decision of the rajasthan high court), were made subject wp(c)184/2007 & connected matters page 4 of 90 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... and promoted violent enmity against the sikh community and disturbed harmony between the two religious groups/communities of the locality in retaliation of the assassination of smt. indira gandhi, giving rise to feelings of enmity, hatred, and ill will between members of the non-sikh and sikh communities which was prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony ..... of that statement was doubtful. likewise, pw-17 deposed that despite his best efforts, si arjun singh who purportedly recorded that statement could not be traced. the hindi version of the statement shows that it appears to have been tailor-made to screen the offenders. it states how the assailants came from the rear side of the ..... but she refused to join the investigation and gave in writing through her daughter gurjeet kaur in crl.a. 1099/2013 & connected matters page 53 of 203 hindi that she did not wish to join the investigation and that she could not identify anyone. pw-1 had voluntarily signed the statement that she was not making .....
Tag this Judgment!