Court : Chennai
Decided on : Feb-10-2015
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:10. 2.2015 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.140 of 2014 1.Imayam Trust Rep. by its Chairman P.Periannan, Kannanur, Thuraiyur Taluk, Trichy District. 2.P.Periannan, S/o.Palaniyandi, Chairman, Imayam Trust, East Street, Nagama Naicken Patty, Thuraiyur Taluk, Trichy District. 3.A.Andy, S/o.Ammasi Kavundar, Vice Chairman, Imayam Trust, No.131/1, Kottaimedu Street, Kottapalayam Village, Thuraiyur Taluk, Trichy District. 4.A.Nagammal, W/o.Ammasi Kavundar, Trustee, Imayam Trust, No.131/1, Kottaimedu Street, Kottapalayam Village, Thuraiyur Taluk, Trichy District. 5.A.Malliga, W/o.Andy, Trustee, Imayam Trust, No.131/1, Kottaimedu Street, Kottapalayam Village, Thuraiyur Taluk, Trichy District. 6.P.Reesa, W/o.Periaannan, Trustee, Imayam Trust, East Street, Nagamma Naicken Patty, Thuraiyur Taluk, Trichy District. 7.P.Sivakumar, S/o.Periannan, Vice Chairman, Imayam Trust, East Street, Nagama Naicken Patty, Kottapalaya...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-09-2015
.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:9. h February, 2015 % + I.A. No.2402/2010 in CS(OS) 332/2010 CHOICE HOTELS INTERNATIONAL INC ..... Plaintiff Through Ms.Abhilasha Nautiyal, Adv. with Mr.Raunaq Kamath, Adv. versus M SANJAY KUMAR AND ANR ..... Defendants Through Mr.S.Santanam Swaminadhan, Adv. with Ms.Insha Mir & Ms.Shagufa Salim, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, dilution of trademarks, damages, delivery up etc. against the defendants.2. By this order, I propose to decide the pending application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC being I.A. No.2402/2010 filed by the plaintiff.3. The plaintiff's case as per the plaint is as under: (i) The plaintiff is a hospitality holding corporation originally set up in 1939 as a non-profit association under the name Quality Courts United, and became Choice Hotels Internati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Feb-09-2015
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the State of Maharashtra, aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna on 28th November, 1996, thereby acquitting the Respondents for the offence punishable under sections 302 and 498-A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. In short, the prosecution case is that, deceased Madhavi daughter of PW 3 Madhukar Lambe was married to accused No.1 before three years of her death. Accused made demand of Rs. 3,000/- for purchase of T.V. and suspected her character. In furtherance of common intention, all the accused committed murder of Madhavi and thereafter set her dead body on fire. 3. The prosecution examined Ramrao Kulkarni as PW-1, who is panch to inquest pachanama, Sitaram Lambe was examined as PW-2, grand father of deceased, Madhukar Lambe was examined as PW-3, father of the deceased, Dr. Bhadre was examined as PW-4 and Arun Bharaskar was examined as PW-5. Inquest panchanama is at Exhibit-10, Spot panchan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-06-2015
ORDER SHEET GA No.2725 of 2014 GA No.2728 of 2014 WITH AP No.220 of 1997 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE UNION OF INDIA Versus MANJU GUHA & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER Date :6. h February, 2015. Appearance : Mr. Partha Sarathy Bose, Sr. Adv. Mr. Indrajeet Dasgupta, Adv. for the Union of India Mr. Kushal Pane, Adv. for the respondent The Court: GA No.2725 of 2014 is an application for condonation of delay of 2590 days for filing of a restoration application, being G.A. No.2728 of 2014. The restoration application is in respect of a setting aside application which was dismissed for default on 12th July, 2007. It appears that the litigation was handled on behalf of the Executive Engineer, Coochbehar, Central Division II of the Central Public Works Department by the Central Government Advocate at Kolkata. Pursuant to filing of the application for condonation of delay of 2590 days, this Court had earlier observed on 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Feb-06-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No. 134 of 2011 -------- Sita Kumari wife of Sri Dina Nath Mahto, resident of Mohalla- Sheopuri, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribag (Sadar, District- Hazaribag ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. A.K. Singh, the Chief Secretary, State of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District-Ranchi 3. Smt. Anjali Das, Director, Health Services, Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. and P.S.- Doranda, District- Ranchi 4. Ravindra Kumar, Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh 5. Ram Naresh Jha, Regional Deputy Director, Health Services, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh, P.O.- Hazaribagh, P.S.- Hazaribagh (Sadar), District- Hazaribagh 6. Binod Narayan, Chief Medical Officer, Sadar Hospital, Hazaribagh, P.O.- Hazaribagh, P.S.- Hazaribagh (Sadar), District- Hazaribagh 7. Shashi Shanker Prasad, Additional Chief Medical Officer, Sadar Hospital, Hazaribagh, P.O.- Hazaribagh, P.S.- Hazaribagh (Sadar), District- Hazaribagh 8. S. K. Kant, I...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-03-2015
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (C) NO.252 OF2004SUBHAS DATTA ...PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.1. This petition has been filed as public interest litigation on the issue of protection of historical objects preserved at different places in the country particularly in various museums. Prayer in the petition is for a direction for adequate security arrangements and for proper investigation into the incidents of theft and damage to several historical objects and also for making an inventory of available articles for future.2. Initially, the respondent in the writ petition was the Union of India through Ministry of Human Resource Development but by order of this Court dated 7th July, 2008, the Director General, National Museum, Janpath, New Delhi; the Director General, Archaeological Survey of India, Janpath, New Delhi; the Director, National Gallery of Modern Art, Jaipur House, India...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Feb-03-2015
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 300 of 1998 (P) With Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 167 of 1998 (P) ----------- Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.03.1998 and 01.04.1998 respectively passed by Sri Swaroop Lal, 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Godda in Sessions Case No. 15 of 1995 / 89 of 1996. ----------- 1. Pappu Yadav, son of Surya Narayan Yadav 2. Sanjay Yadav, son of Shashipal Yadav, Both are residents of village Darmodih, Police Station- Mahagama, District- Godda ... Appellants [in Cr.Appeal (D.B.) no. 300 of 1998 (P)] 1. Manoj Yadav @ Manohar Yadav @ Manoj Kumar Yadav, Son of Late Jaydeo Prasad Yadav, 2. Naresh Yadav Son of Late Ankeshwar Prasad Yadav 3. Pramod Yadav, Son of late Surya Narayan Yadav, All residents of village Darmodih, Police Station Mahagama, District-Godda ... Appellants [in Cr.Appeal (D.B.) no. 167 of 1998 (P)] --Versus-- The State of Bihar now Jharkhand . . Respondent(In both cases) For the Appellants : M/s. A.K.Kashyap, Sr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Feb-03-2015
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 300 of 1998 (P) With Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 167 of 1998 (P) ----------- Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.03.1998 and 01.04.1998 respectively passed by Sri Swaroop Lal, 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Godda in Sessions Case No. 15 of 1995 / 89 of 1996. ----------- 1. Pappu Yadav, son of Surya Narayan Yadav 2. Sanjay Yadav, son of Shashipal Yadav, Both are residents of village Darmodih, Police Station- Mahagama, District- Godda ... Appellants [in Cr.Appeal (D.B.) no. 300 of 1998 (P)] 1. Manoj Yadav @ Manohar Yadav @ Manoj Kumar Yadav, Son of Late Jaydeo Prasad Yadav, 2. Naresh Yadav Son of Late Ankeshwar Prasad Yadav 3. Pramod Yadav, Son of late Surya Narayan Yadav, All residents of village Darmodih, Police Station Mahagama, District-Godda ... Appellants [in Cr.Appeal (D.B.) no. 167 of 1998 (P)] --Versus-- The State of Bihar now Jharkhand . . Respondent(In both cases) For the Appellants : M/s. A.K.Kashyap, Sr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-03-2015
A.S. Oka, J. 1. A notice for final disposal was issued in this Petition. Accordingly, the Petition is taken up for final hearing. THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE CHALLENGE IN THE PETITION 2. This Petition concerns lands bearing Gat Nos.310 and 311 situated at village Kusgaon Budruk, Taluka Maval, District Pune (hereinafter referred to as the said lands). The Petitioner Trust is claiming to be the owner of the said lands on the basis of separate registered Sale Deeds executed by one Mr. Gajanan Krushnaji Bapaye and others. 3. The Petitioner Trust has constructed an educational campus on the adjacent land bearing Gat No.309. The Petitioner Trust proposes to undertake a project of setting up a Golf course on the said lands. No activities could be started on the land bearing Gat No.310 out of the said lands as there is an ad-interim order of this Court. However, the work of internal access road was started on the land bearing Gat No. 311. The said work was objected by the officers of the For...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-02-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:02. 02.2015 W.P.(C) 3110/2011 & CM65772011 MOTHER DAIRY FRUIT & VEGETABLE PRIVATE LIMITED versus ..... Petitioner HATIM ALI & ANR. ..... Respondents AND + W.P.(C) 5809/2011 and CM118332011 MOTHER DAIRY FRUIT & VEGETABLE PRIVATE LIMITED versus ..... Petitioner ASEEM TAKYAR ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Arvind Nigam, Sr. Advocate with Ms Shweta Bharti. For the Respondent : Mr.Y.R. Malhotra in W.P.(C) 3110/2011. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner calls into question rulings of the Central Information Commission (hereafter CIC) order dated 15.04.2011 impugned in W.P.(C) No.3110/2011 and order dated 08.06.2011 impugned in W.P.(C) No.5809/2011 (hereafter impugned orders) - holding the petitioner to be a Public Authority within the meaning of section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereafter the Act) and calling upon the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!