Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-28-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :25. h March, 2014 Date of Decision:28. h May, 2014 % + CRIMINAL APPEAL No.615/2011 ASIF @ SHABBU STATE ..... Appellant Through Mr. R.S. Dakha and Mr. Jagjit Singh, Advocates. versus ..... Respondent Through Mr. RajatKatyal, APP with Inspector Manoj Pant, SHO Gandhi Nagar. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.688/2011 NADEEM @ CHICKNA ..... Appellant Through Mr. Gurbaksh Singh and Ms. RichaSamhita, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. RajatKatyal, APP with Inspector Manoj Pant, SHO Gandhi Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL SANJIV KHANNA, J: The impugned judgment dated 31st March, 2011 convicts Asif @ Shabbu and Nadeem @ Chikna under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860(IPC, for short) and Section 392 read with Section 397/34 IPC.2. By order on sentence dated 6th April, 2011, the two appellants have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on : May-30-2014
M.S Nambiar (Judicial Member): 1. This application is for review/modification of the final order dated 03.04.2014 passed in original application no. 58/2013 filed by respondent No. 11/ Noticee no. 34 (M/s Jaypee Infratech Ltd.). By order dated 03.04.2014, the original application was disposed of giving certain directions making it clear that the decision taken by the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF) based on those directions will be subject to the final decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The O.A. was filed praying for a direction against the respondents to prevent illegal and unauthorized construction works undertaken by the developers within a radius of 10 Kms. from the boundary of the Okhla Bird Sanctuary. While the original application was pending, by interim order dated 28.10.2013 based on the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 04.12.2006 in "Goa Foundation Vs. Union of India". It was held that any new project which is being considered for the purpose of issuance...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-01-2014
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:1. t July, 2014 % + CS(OS) 2589/2013 M/S ALLIED BLENDERS & DISTILLERS PVT. LTD.....Plaintiff Through: Mr. T.R. Andhyarujina and Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advs. with Mr. Shrawan Chopra & Ms. T. Saukshmya, Advs. Versus SHREE NATH HERITAGE LIQUOR PVT. LTD. ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Sanjay Jain, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sumit Rajput, Ms. Aastha Jain, Mr. Sarfaraz Ahmad and Mr. Rajul Jain, Advs. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.IA No.20759/2013 (of the plaintiff u/O XXXIX Rules 1&2 CPC) 1. The plaintiff has instituted this suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from selling, distributing, advertising or dealing in alcoholic beverages especially Indian made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) or goods of any description bearing the trade mark Collectors Choice or any other mark deceptively similar to the plaintiffs trade mark Officers Choice and amounting to infringement of the plaintiffs registered trade m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-02-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :28. h MARCH, 2014 DECIDED ON :02. d JULY, 2014 + CRL.A.No.1024/2011 MAN MOHAN VIKAL Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Ramesh Gupta, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Mukesh Kalia & Mr.Karan Sachdeva, Advocates. versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through : + ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CRL.A.No.1124/2011 & CRL.M.B.No.2830/2014 NEPAL CHAND ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Mukesh Kalia, Advocate with Mr.Karan Sachdeva, Advocate. versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. AND + CRL.A.No.1099/2011 RAJESH BHATI ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Mukesh Kalia, Advocate with Mr.Karan Sachdeva, Advocate. versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Man Mohan Vikal (A-1), Nepal Chand (A-2) and Rajesh Bhati (A-3) impugn a judgment dated 30.07.2011 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.88/08 arising out of FIR No.146/05 P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-15-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT New Delhi Judgment Reserved on: July 10 , 2014 Judgment Delivered on: July 15 , 2014 % + CRL.A. 532/1998 MOHD. ANIS & ANR Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.M.L.Yadav, Adv. versus NCT OF DELHI Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. By the present appeal, the appellants had challenged the judgment dated August 13, 1998 convicting them for offences under Sections 302/307/34 IPC and the order on sentence dated August 18, 1998 directing them to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of `3000/- each for offences under Sections 302/34 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of `5000/- for offence punishable under Section 307/34 IPC. During the pendency of the present appeal, appellant No.1 passed away and thus the appeal qua him stood abated. Thus, the present appeal is now confined to appellant No.2 Mohd.Khalid S/o Mo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-23-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 17, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: July 23, 2014 % + CRL.A. 969/2012 MAJID SHEIKH MANSOORI ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms.Arpan Wadhawan, Advocate for Ms.Manjusha, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Mahesh Kasana, ATO/Sangam Vihar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Majid Sheikh Mansoori has been held guilty for having murdered his wife Vidya. The learned Trial Judge has returned the verdict of guilt believing Azaruddin PW-7 and Shakil Mohammad PW-19 to be truthful eye witnesses. Recovery of knife Ex.P-1 pursuant to Majid Sheikh Mansooris disclosure statement which was opined by Dr.Raghvinder Kumar PW-4 as capable of causing the 17 stab wounds on Vidya is the other incriminating evidence relied upon. After holding Majid Sheikh Mansoori guilty for the offence of murder vide impugned...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-24-2014
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ST.REF. 1/2013 Date of decision:24. h July, 2014 REMARI INDIA (P) LTD. ..... Petitioner Through Mr. A.K. Babbar and Mr. Surendra Kumar, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER SALES TAX, DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr. H.C. Bhatia, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) Appellate Tribunal, Value Added Tax (Tribunal, for short) vide order dated 25th April, 2008 in Appeal No.49/STT/04-05 relating to assessment year 2000-01 (Local), has referred the following question of law to this Court under Section 45(1) of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 (for short, Act):"Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant Appellate Tribunal VAT was correct in holding that the transfer of property in the goods from the appellant company to M/s Hyaat, Katmandu (Nepal) took place after and not before the goods were cleared for export out of India?." 2. The Appeal No.49/STT/04-0...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 21, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: July 24, 2014 % + CRL.A. 791/2000 SITA RAM Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Saurabh Kansal, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Three accused named Dhanvir, Chander Pal and Sita Ram (appellant) were jointly tried for an offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC as also for the offence punishable under Section 392/397/34 IPC and for an offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act.2. Vide decision dated February 27, 1998, the three accused were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC. Pal and Sita Ram were found guilty Chander of the offence punishable under Section 392/34 IPC as also for the offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act. Dhanvir was found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 392/397/34 IPC as a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-28-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 23, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: July 28, 2014 % + CRL.A. 207/2012 VIPIN @ KAKE Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.H.R.Dhamija, Mr.N.S.Verma, Mr.N.S.Verma, Advs. versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Vinod Diwakar, APP for State with Insp.Naresh Kumar PS Badarpur. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Vipin @ Kake has been held guilty of murder of Humayun. The finding of guilt has been returned on the basis of ocular testimony of Ram Avtar @ Bobby PW-15, the recovery of country made pistol with empty cartridge case at the instance of Vipin, FSL report and the mobile phone showing the presence of the appellant at the spot. All this happening on a sudden quarrel between Vipin and Humayun and could have been averted if Ram Avtar had reached in time with the ice-cream to cool their heated minds. The learned Trial Court after holding Vipin guilty for offenc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-28-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on: July 28, 2014 + CS(OS) 2243/2014 STAR INDIA PVT LTD & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr.Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Sidharth Chopra, Ms.Sneha Jain, Mr.Prateek Chadha and Ms.Savni Dutt, Advs. versus HANEETH UJWAL & ORS Through ..... Defendants None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) I.A. No.13873/2014 This is an application filed by the plaintiffs under Order 13 Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC seeking exemption from filing the originals of the documents. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed, subject to originals being produced at the time of admission/denial of the documents. The application is disposed of. I.A. No.13874/2014 This is an application filed by the plaintiffs seeking exemption from filing the certified copies, clear copies, translations of documents and the left side margin. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed, subject to just...
Tag this Judgment!