Court : Kerala
Decided on : Mar-03-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE3D DAY OF MARCH201512TH PHALGUNA, 1936 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 255 of 2015 () ------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMP9582014 of ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER & SPECIAL JUDGE, KOTTAYAM DATED2811.2014 REVISION PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------ NOBLE MATHEW, AGED53YEARS S/O.LATE M.D MATHEW, MANNAMPLACKAL HOUSE CHIRAKKADAVU P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT686520. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA - 682 031.2. K.M MANI, AGED ABOUT85YEARS, S/O.LATE MANI,KARINGOZHACKAL HOUSE, VELLAPPAD, PALA, LALAM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. R1 BY ADVOCATE GENERAL SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0303-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J.------------------------------ Crl.R.P.No.255 of 201...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-03-2015
$ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 558/2012 % Decided on: BABITA JAIN Through:3. d March, 2015 ..... Petitioner Praveen Kumar Jain and Mr. Naveen Kumar Jain, Advocates. versus MAYA GARG Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sharad Chandra and Mr. Sanjay Agarwal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J (ORAL) 1. Aggrieved by the order dated 19th September, 2012 whereby the leave to defend application of the Respondent was allowed by the learned ARC in an eviction petition filed by the Petitioner under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short the DRC Act) the Petitioner prefers the present petition.2. In the eviction petition, the Petitioner stated that the Petitioner along with the sister-in-law purchased the built up property bearing No.E-2/19, Jain Market, Shashtri Nagar, Delhi-110052 admeasuring 196 Sq. Yards vide registered Sale Deed dated 10th February, 2005. The first floor of the said property was being used by the Petit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-02-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.1280/2012 Reserved on:3. d February, 2015 Pronounced on:2. d March, 2015 % SEEMA SAPRA ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person. versus GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Vivek Goyal, CGSC for R-5/UOI. Mr. N.Ganpathy with Mr.Manpreet Lamba, Adv. for R-1, 6 and 7. ` Mr. Om Prakash, Adv. with Ms. Honey Kolawar, Adv. for Ministry of Railways. Ms. Firdouse Qutbwani Adv. for R13. Mr.Vikram Dhokalia, Advocate for R-16. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J1 This writ petition, which is essentially in two parts qua the causes of action and reliefs claimed, can be in one way disposed of by a very short judgment, because, the first part/aspect and the reliefs claimed with respect thereto of challenge to the 2010 tender process of Railways for setting up manufacturing units for diesel and electric locomotive tenders has bec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-02-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4177/2002 % Judgement reserved on:12. 02.2015 Judgement pronounced on:02. 03.2015 M.C.D. ..... Petitioner Through: Ms Shyel Trehan and Ms Tejaswi Shetty, Advs. versus RAJNI SHARMA & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Rajiv Aggarwal and Ms.Neelam Tiwari, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT1 Vide this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the award dated 16.04.2001, passed in ID No.14/1998 by the Industrial Tribunal. Vide this award, the Industrial Tribunal has held that Kumari Rajni Sharma (hereinafter referred to as the workman) is entitled to be reinstated as LDC/Typist instead of Beldar in terms of award dated 09.10.1995, passed by Shri Nepal Singh, in ID No.105/88.2. The brief history of the case is that the workman was in the employment of the petitioner. She had been appointed as a muster roll/ daily rated/casual worker with effect from 10.06.1986. Her services were terminated with effect from 18.08...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-27-2015
.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:27. h February, 2015 % + I.A. No.11918/2012 in CS(OS) 1931/2012 JOHNSON & JOHNSON Through ..... Plaintiff Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Sr. Adv. With Mr. Deepak Gogia & Ms. Priya Rao, Advs. versus LUPIN LIMITED AND ANR ..... Defendants Through Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. With Ms. Alka Parelkar, Mr. Varun Singh, Mr. Anuj Sharma & Mr. Anshumaan Sahni, Advs. for D-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining passing off and rendition of accounts and/or damages, against the defendants in respect of the mark LUCYNTA.2. By this order, I propose to decide the pending application being I.A. No.11918/2012 filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC read with Section 151 CPC.3. Brief facts of the case as per plaint are : i) That the plaintiff, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of State of New Jersey, USA, was founded i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Feb-27-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated :7. 8.2009 Coram: The Honourable Mr.Justice P.JYOTHIMANI O.P.No.588 of 2007 and O.A.No.300 of 2009 M/s.Arunoday Developers rep. by its Proprietrix Mrs.Aruna Parwal No.7, Doctors' Lane Gole Market, New Delhi-110 001. .. Petitioner Vs.1. M/s.Gemini Arts Private Ltd. rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Mr.Ravishankar Prasad 601, Mount Road, Chennai 600 006.2. M/s.Green Gardens Private Limited rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Mr.Ravishankar Prasad 601, Mount Road, Chennai 600 006.3. Justice Sri S.Ramalingam (Retired) Sole Arbitrator, No.9, Madha Church Road Mandavelipakkam, Chennai 600 028. .. Respondents Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. For Petitioner : Mrs.Malini Ganesh For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.T.V.Ramanujun Senior Counsel for Mr.Y.N.Venkatraj ORDER This original petition is filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for brevity, "the Act") agai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-27-2015
Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2538-40 OF2015(Arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 2487-2489 of 2015) Mohd. Akbar ...Appellant Versus Ashok Sahu & Ors. ...Respondents JUDGMENT Chelameswar, J.1. Leave granted.2. The General Election to Chhattisgarh Legislative Assembly took place in 2013. The appellant herein is one of the contesting candidates for 72- Kawardha Legislative Assembly Constituency.3. Polling took place on 19.11.2013. The result was declared on 8.12.2013. First respondent was declared elected. The appellant secured the second highest number of votes in the said election. On 20.1.2014, the appellant filed Election Petition No.4 of 2014 challenging the election of the first respondent on various grounds including the commission of certain corrupt practices. On 29.1.2014, the High Court issued summons to the respondents.4. It appears that matter was listed on 25.3.2014. It is not very clear from the records whether all th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Feb-27-2015
1 INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(L)No.5609of2014 1.ArunKumarSingh,SonoflateS.K.Singh,residentofQuarterNo. K2/36,RoadNo.8,TelcoColony,PO&PSTelco,Town Jamshedpur, DistrictEastSinghbhum 2.Harshvardhan,SonofSriRamAwadheshSingh,residentofK21, CrossRoadNo.15,TelcoColony,PO&PSTelco,TownJamshedpur, DistrictEastSinghbhum Petitioners Versus 1.TheStateofJharkhandthroughitsSecretary,Departmentof Labour,Govt.ofJharkhand,SecretariatBuilding,NepalHouse,PO& PSDoranda,DistrictRanchi 2.TheLabourCommissionercumRegistrar,TradeUnion, GovernmentofJharkhad,H.E.C.Township,ProjectBuilding,PO&PS Dhurwa,DistrictRanchi 3.TheDeputyCommissioner,EastSinghbhum,PO&PSJamshedpur, TownJamshedpur,DistrictEastSinghbhum 4.TheSeniorSuperintendentofPolice,EastSinghbhum,PO&PS Jamshedpur,TownJamshedpur,DistrictEastSinghbhum 5.TelcoWorkersUnions,aUnionregisteredundertheTradeUnions Act,1928,situatedatH.S.Road,TelcoColony,PO&PSTelco,Town Jamshedpur,DistrictEastSinghbhum,JharkhandthroughitsGeneral Secretary,SriChandra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-27-2015
1. The above suit was settled under consent terms dated 2nd December 2003. An order was passed in terms of the consent terms on 12th January 2004. The suit came to be disposed off in terms of the consent terms on 12th January, 2004. The consent terms are sought to be executed by plaintiff Nos. 3 and 4 and defendant Nos. 17 and 18 (plaintiff) against defendant No.16 (defendant). The consent terms would require to be executed within 12 years of the order being passed in terms thereof. Hence the consent terms would have to be executed on or before 11th January 2016. The execution has been levied in 2011. 2. The plaintiff as well as the defendant took out various chamber summonses. The plaintiffs chamber summonses were for appointment of court receiver and redevelopment of the property. They have been dismissed. The defendants chamber summons were for setting aside the warrant of attachment upon the suit property. The personal residential immovable property of defendant No.16 has been atta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-26-2015
$~R-31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 393/2013 Date of decision:26. 02.2015 TASLEEM @ HATTU Through ..... Appellant Mr. M.L. Yadav, Advocate. versus THE STATE (G.N.C.T OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through Mr. Varun Goswami, APP. Insp. Anil Kumar, P.S. Bawana. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) Appellant Tasleem @ Hattu by the impugned judgment dated 25th May, 2012 has been convicted for murder and rape of his sister aged about 12 years on 23rd August, 2008. The appellant has also been convicted under Section 506 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short). By order on sentence dated 26th May, 2012, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 302, IPC; rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and fine of Rs.3,000/-, and in default of payment t...
Tag this Judgment!