Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-12-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI IA No.3997 of 2012 in CS (OS) No.523 of 2012 Reserved on: November 26, 2013 Decision on: December 12, 2013 U. VARADARAYA NAYAK ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Swathi Sukumar with Mr. Anirudha Mitra, Ms. Anur Paarcha and Ms.Essenese Obhan, Advocates. versus S.K. ANAND & ORS. Through: ..... Defendants Mr. Mahender Rana, Advocate for Defendant No.1. Mr. Amarjeet Singh, Mr. Hari Subramanium, Ms. Vernika Tomar and Ms. Vibha Arya, Advocates for Defendants 2 to 4. Mr. Sanjeev Mahajan, Advocate for Defendants 5 and 6. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT1212.2013 1. This judgment disposes of the application by the Plaintiff U. Varadaraya Nayak under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (CPC) for interim relief. Background facts 2. The Plaintiff has filed the above suit seeking a permanent injunction to restrain the Defendants from infringing Patent No.184118 granted in his name for a twin blade razor. At the time of filing of the suit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on : December 11, 2013 + CRL.A. 1079/2010 BEERU Through ..... Appellant Avi Singh, Advocate versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Sunil Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR JUDGMENT % KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.1. One can visibly see the growth of the country in all spheres keeping a pace with the modernization, advancement, science and technology but unfortunately the only front which is on the decline is the moral values. In the recent past, the country has witnessed too many horrifying and heart rendering incidents of rapes and many of such cases were so brutal and barbaric, that they jolted the society to ponder whether such beastly acts can be committed by a human being on the other. Amongst such horrifying incidents, sexual assaults involving minor children are the worst and amongst the worst, the cases involving sexual ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-16-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :03. 09.2013 Judgment delivered on:16. 12.2013 % + WP(C) 360/2013 PHAGUNI NILESH LAL ..... Petitioner Versus THE REGISTRAR GENERAL, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner: Mr Rajeev Sharma, Mr Uddyam Mukherjee & Mr Sahil Bhalaik, Advs. For the Respondents: Mr A.S. Chandhiok, Additional Solicitor General with Mr Ritesh Kumar, Mr Piyush Sanghi, Ms Shweta Gupta, Ms Honey Kumari & Ms Mallika Ahluwalia, Advs. for respondent No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.WP(C) No.360/2013 & CM No.739/2013 (Stay) BACKGROUND1 The petitioner is a topper of her batch. She pursued her studies in law at the Army Institute of Law, situate at Mohali (i.e., respondent no.2). Respondent No.2, is affiliated to the Punjabi University, at Patiala, and is recognized by the Bar Council of India. 1.1 The petitioner, has approached this court for redressal of her ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-20-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on:16. 12.2013 Date of Decision:20. 12.2013 + W.P.(C) 5283/2013 YASH SEHRAWAT ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sindhawani, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sumati Anand & Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Advs. versus BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Sibal, Ms. R.Rangaswamy, Mr. R. Kumar & Mr. Pratek Chadha, Advs. for R-1. Mr. J.S. Bakshi & Mr A.S. Bakshi, Advs. for R-2. + W.P.(C) 5284/2013 ARYAN SEHRAWAT ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sindhawani, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sumati Anand & Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Advs. versus BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Sibal, Ms. R.Rangaswamy, Mr. R. Kumar & Mr. Pratek Chadha, Advs. for R-1. Mr. J.S. Bakshi & Mr A.S. Bakshi, Advs. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.The only issue involved in these writ petitions is as to whether the respondents are entitled to determine the age of a person seek...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-20-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on:16. 12.2013 Date of Decision:20. 12.2013 + W.P.(C) 5283/2013 YASH SEHRAWAT ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sindhawani, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sumati Anand & Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Advs. versus BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Sibal, Ms. R.Rangaswamy, Mr. R. Kumar & Mr. Pratek Chadha, Advs. for R-1. Mr. J.S. Bakshi & Mr A.S. Bakshi, Advs. for R-2. + W.P.(C) 5284/2013 ARYAN SEHRAWAT ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sindhawani, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sumati Anand & Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Advs. versus BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Sibal, Ms. R.Rangaswamy, Mr. R. Kumar & Mr. Pratek Chadha, Advs. for R-1. Mr. J.S. Bakshi & Mr A.S. Bakshi, Advs. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.The only issue involved in these writ petitions is as to whether the respondents are entitled to determine the age of a person seek...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-20-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on :12.12.2013 Judgment delivered on:20.12.2013 CRL.A.344/1998 JAWAHAR BALWANI AND ANR Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Mukesh Kalia, Adv. Versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Sunil Sharma, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 On 19.10.1993 on the second floor of house No.F-1U173 Pitam Pura, Delhi, the dead body of Rita was discovered. This discovery had been made by her husband Madan Lal (PW-13) who on returning home at 08:15-08:30 pm from his shop at Sadar Bazar found the lights in the building off; on entering the room and switching on the light, he found articles scattered on the ground; in the drawing room, the dead body of his wife Rita was lying; the television was on at full volume; his son Bharat Parwani (PW-6) was lying in an injured condition and was groaning for water. He was not in a condition to speak. Brother of PW13 Raj Kumar (PW-9) living o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-17-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:17. h December, 2013 + W.P.(C) 8017/2012 NANAK CHAND ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K.Saini, Adv. with Ms. Seema Salwan, Adv. versus DDA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Arun Birbal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT G.P. MITTAL, J.1. By virtue of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks allotment of a similar MIG Flat as Flat No.188, (FF), Pocket-B, Sector 13, Dwarka allotted to him was cancelled without any just and reasonable ground.2. At the time of hearing of the writ petition, Mr. R.K.Saini, learned counsel for the Petitioner conceded that if the Petitioner is found to be entitled to a similar flat now, he (the Petitioner) has no objection in accepting the allotment at current cost.3. The Petitioner got himself registered for allotment of an MIG flat under the Ambedkar Awas Yojna. He was allotted the Registration No.6362. At the time of registration, he gave his...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-19-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :03. d DECEMBER, 2013 DECIDED ON :19. h DECEMBER, 2013 + CRL.A. 597/2000 ANIL @ BITTOO Through : ....Appellant Ms.Inderjeet Sidhu, Advocate with Mr.Ram Kumar, Advocate. versus .Respondent STATE Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Anil @ Bittoo (the appellant) questions the correctness and legality of a judgment dated 19.09.2000 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.603/96 arising out of FIR No.441/93 PS Ashok Vihar whereby he was held guilty for committing offence under Section 307 IPC and by an order dated 23.09.2000 awarded RI for three and a half years with fine ` 1,500/-.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on 20.12.1993 at about 08.50 P.M. in a gali outside House No.J-II/41, Wazirpur, JJ Colony, Delhi, he and his associates Rangila, Tika Ram and Pawan Kumar (since acquitted) inflicted injuries to Mane Ram and Raj Rani. First Information Report was lodged after...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : Mar-06-2013
V.K. Gupta, Member(Judicial): 1. This appeal by the appellant/OP of complaint case No.846/2006 is directed against the order dated 21.01.2009 passed by District Forum(New Delhi), directing the appellant to refund Rs.3300/- as fee, Rs.30,000/- as compensation and Rs.5000/- as litigation charges. 2. In nut-shell the brief facts are that on 08.06.2006 a baby was born and the doctors directed the complainant for specific tests to ascertain the genitalai of the baby. The doctor further suggested following case. (i) Sodium, serum (ii) Potassium, serum (iii) Buccal simear/Barr Bodie (iv) Chromosome (Karyctype) 3. The baby was borne at Ram Chand Memorial Nursing Home, which advised that the tests to be conducted by the appellant/OP. Consequently on 09.06.2006 the baby was taken to the laboratory of the appellant for aforesaid tests which charged Rs.3300/-. Respondent/complainant was asking for the report and every time it was directed that the report will be given on 29.06.2006. On this date t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on : Dec-05-2013
V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J): 1. Heard, Shri S.C. Jindal for the applicant and Mrs. Jyoti Singh, learned senior counsel for the respondents on the issue of maintainability of the present T.A. 2.The applicant, NDMC Avam Karamchari Bachao Morcha, a Registered Union of employees of NDMC under the Indian Trade Unions Act, 1926, through its General Secretary, originally filed the Writ Petition (C) No.5244/2013 before the Honble High Court of Delhi seeking the following reliefs: (a)To issue a Writ of Quo Warranto holding that the extension of Respondent No.4 as Advisor (Revenue) and Advisor (Legal) NDMC is illegal and void under the New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 and instructions of the Government issued from time to time and the post be filled up by Respondent No.1 in accordance with law. To set up an independent enquiry into the alleged illegality and conspiracy made by Respondents with other officials of NDMC who are giving extension after extension to Respondent No.4 in violation of ...
Tag this Judgment!