Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1205/2012 Date of Decision:8. h October, 2013 ISHTIYAK Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Joginder Tuli and Mr. A.K. Sharma, Advocates. versus STATE(NCT OF DELHI) Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Dayan Krishnan, ASC for the State with ASI Om Prakash, PS Hauz Khas. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned order of learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 10th July, 2012, vide which the charge under Section 3 of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred as MCOCA) was framed against the petitioner in FIR No.269/2011, PS Hauz Khas.2. The brief facts as they emerge from the record are that the petitioner Mohd. Ishtiyaq was apprehended during vehicle checking in the area of PS Hauz Khas, New Delhi in a car baring No.DL6 Q339...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... mittal hon'ble mr. justice j.r. midha w.p.(c)no.4770/2012 page 2 of 531 gita mittal, j. there can be peace only if there is justice - mahatma gandhi 1. the instant writ petitions challenge the constitutionality and validity of the court fees (delhi amendment) act, 2012 delhi act 11 of 2012 whereby the legislative assembly of the national ..... the executive, article 14 immediately springs into action and strikes down such state action. (see also: e.p. royappa v. state of tamil nadu and anr. : air1974sc555 and smt. meneka gandhi v. union of india and anr. : air1978sc597.51. in m/s. sharma transport rep. by d.p. sharma v. government of a.p. and ors. : air2002sc322 this court defined ..... tested on the touchstone of article 14 of the constitution. (ref. welfare assn., a.r.p.v. ranjit p. gohil [(2003) 9 scc358 .) xxx xxx xxx 45. in maneka gandhi v. union of india [(1978) 1 scc248 and charan lal sahu v. union of india [(1990) 1 scc613 , the court has taken the view that when the constitutionality of a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... mittal hon'ble mr. justice j.r. midha w.p.(c)no.4770/2012 page 2 of 531 gita mittal, j. there can be peace only if there is justice - mahatma gandhi 1. the instant writ petitions challenge the constitutionality and validity of the court fees (delhi amendment) act, 2012 delhi act 11 of 2012 whereby the legislative assembly of the national ..... the executive, article 14 immediately springs into action and strikes down such state action. (see also: e.p. royappa v. state of tamil nadu and anr. : air1974sc555 and smt. meneka gandhi v. union of india and anr. : air1978sc597.51. in m/s. sharma transport rep. by d.p. sharma v. government of a.p. and ors. : air2002sc322 this court defined ..... tested on the touchstone of article 14 of the constitution. (ref. welfare assn., a.r.p.v. ranjit p. gohil [(2003) 9 scc358 .) xxx xxx xxx 45. in maneka gandhi v. union of india [(1978) 1 scc248 and charan lal sahu v. union of india [(1990) 1 scc613 , the court has taken the view that when the constitutionality of a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order reserved on:08. 07.2013 % + Order delivered on:07. 11.2013 CS(OS) 290/2010 KHAWAR BUTT ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Manish Kaushik, Advocate with Mr. Vivek Singh, Advocate versus ASIF NAZIR MIR & ORS ..... Defendant Through: Ms. Manmeet Arora, Ms. Mansi Sharma and Ms. Nidhi Parashar, Advocates CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI ORDER VIPIN SANGHI, J.I.A. No.13629/2011 (U/O7rule 11(a) read with Section 151 CPC by the defendant) I.A. No.13630/2011 (U/O6Rule 16 read with Section 151 CPC by the defendant) I.A. No.14479/2011(U/O7Rule 11 and Section 151 CPC by the defendant) I.A. No.8404/2013(U/O6Rule 17 CPC read with Section 151 CPC for amendment of plaint by the plaintiff) 1. By this common order, I proceed to dispose of the aforesaid four applications.2. The plaintiff has preferred the present suit to claim damages of Rs. 1 crore and for mandatory injunction. Initially, there were two defendants in the suit defendant No.1 being Asif Naz...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... the court/tribunal is one of judicial review, the parameters of which are repeatedly laid down by this court. 20. again, he has relied upon the judgment of h.b. gandhi, excise and taxation officer-cum-assessing authority, karnal and others vs. m/s gopi nath and others 1992 supp.2. scc 312. the relevant part of the said order reads .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on: January 10, 2014 CS(OS) 2252/2011 & I.A. No.14617/2011, I.A. No.18553/2011, I.A. No.20143/2011, I.A. No.20144/2011, I.A. No.20167/2011, I.A. No.20762/2011, I.A. No.448/2012 and I.A. No.15808/2012 INSTITUTE FOR INNER STUDIES & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr. Amit Chadha, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Karan Mehra, Mr. Lalit Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Bahaar Dhawan & Ms. Chandni Goel, Advs. versus CHARLOTTE ANDERSON & ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr. B.B. Sawhney, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Dipak Kumar Jena, Adv. & Ms. Minakshi Jena Ghosh, Adv. for D-1. Mr. Viplav Sharma, Adv. for D-2. Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mayank Kshirsagar, Adv. for D-3. Mr. Ajit Pudussery, Adv. with Mr. Dinesh Khurana, Adv. for D-11. Mr. Raghav Awasthi, Adv. for D-14. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiffs, (ten in numbers) have filed the present suit seeking declaration, permanent injunction and mandatory injunction alongwith...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
..... for presentation of petition, parties to the petition and security for cost. the honble supreme court relying upon the decision in the matter of raj narain vs. smt. indira nehru gandhi and another (1972) 3 scc 850 echoed in the form of a note of caution: "rules of pleadings are intended as aids for a fair trial and for reaching a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:29. h January, 2014 + CRL.A. 393/1998 SOHAN LAL @SURESH @ SODA ..... Appellant Through: Mr.M.L.Yadav, Advocate versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Sunil Sharma, APP % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 14th August, 1998 and 17th August, 1998 in Sessions Case No.82/1997 arising out of FIR No.484/1997 u/s 302/34 IPC registered with PS Seelampur whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 302 IPC and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.25000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 36 months. In case of deposit of fine, an amount of Rs.20,000/- is to be paid to the father of the deceased while the remaining amount shall go the State as cost of the proceedings.2. The facts and circumstances giving ris...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... violation of section 25-f of the id act, by directing that the workman should be compensated by payment of a sum of rs 25,000.12. in sbi v. mahatma mishra [(2006) 13 scc727: (2008) 1 scc (l&s) 988]. this court observed that: (scc p. 734, para 12) 12. it [was]. one thing to say that services of a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... violation of section 25-f of the id act, by directing that the workman should be compensated by payment of a sum of rs 25,000.12. in sbi v. mahatma mishra [(2006) 13 scc727: (2008) 1 scc (l&s) 988]. this court observed that: (scc p. 734, para 12) 12. it [was]. one thing to say that services of a .....
Tag this Judgment!