Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-23-2018
* + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:12. 04.2018 Pronounced on:23. 05.2018 LPA2862015, REV.PET.374/2016, C.M. APPL.12086/2017 INDU MUNSHI AND ORS. ........ Petitioners versus UOI AND ORS. LPA6202015, C.M. APPL.47017/2017 GOVT. OF NCT DELHI versus ........ RESPONDENTS ..... Appellant GOVT. SCHOOL TEACHERS ASSOCIATION (MIGRANTS) REGD. AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS in Sh. Ramesh Wangnoo, Advocate, Through: Rev.Pet.374/2016. Sh. Rakesh Tiku, Sr. Advocate with Sh. B.L. Wali and Sh. Gaurav Kohli, Advocates, for petitioners, in LPA6202015. Sh. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Yeeshu Jain, ASC and Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates, for GNCTD. Sh. Arun Bhardwaj, Advocate, for UOI. Sh. Kumar Rajesh Singh and Ms. Punam Singh, Advocates, for EDMC, in Rev. Pet. 374/2016. Sh. Rajan Tyagi, ASC with Ms. Reema Khurana, Advocate, for SDMC and Ms. Muktamay Mandal, AD (Edn), in Rev. Pet.374/2016. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA MR. JUSTICE ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-23-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:21. 09.2017 Pronounced on:23. 05.2018 LPA2312016 & C.M. 13063/2016 (for stay) PRIME MINISTER'S NATIONAL RELIEF FUND ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Ms. Gayatri Aryan & Mr. Srivats Kaushal, Advocates Versus ASEEM TAKYAR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Mahajan, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR + MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % Facts 1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether Prime Ministers National Relief Fund (the Fund/Appellant) is a public authority within the ambit of Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act). The learned single judge held that it was, upholding the decision of the authorities under the Act.2. The respondent in the appeal (hereafter the petitioner) in 2011, applied to the CPIO, Prime Minister's Office (CPIO) for information pertaining to the various transactions made PMNRF during the financial year 2009-2010 an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-23-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :9. h May, 2018 Date of Decision:23. d May, 2018 + RFA1192017 & CM No.4008/2017 RAJ KAMAL MISRA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Raunak Singh, Advocate. (M:9910374731) versus ANIL KHANNA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Arun Khosla, Advocate. (M:9818255789) CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.JUDGMENT1 The present appeal arises out of the impugned order dated 6th June, 2016, by which the application under Order VII Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter CPC) has been allowed and the suit filed by the Appellant/Plaintiff (hereinafter Plaintiff) has been rejected as being barred by limitation.2. Briefly the case of the Plaintiff is that the Plaintiff and the Respondent/Defendant (hereinafter Defendant) were on friendly terms for a long time. The Defendant approached the Plaintiff in 2007 for a friendly loan and the following sums were advanced by the Plaintiff to the De...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-21-2018
$~OS-14 & 15 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision 21.05.2018 + + EX.P. 18/2018 and EA(OS) 70/2018 SH. ASHOK KUMAR POPLI ..... Decree Holder SH. JITENDER KUMAR POPLI Through Mr. Satvik Varma, Mr.Lalltaksh Joshi and Mr.Tanveer Oberio, Advs. versus ..... Judgement Debtor Through Mr. Naval Bhatia and Mr.Preet Pal Singh, Adv. EX.P. 21/2018 and EA (OS) 87-88/2018 & 158/2018 SH. JATINDER KUMAR POPLI ..... Decree Holder SH. RAJIV POPLI AND ORS Through Mr.Naval Bhatia and Mr.Preet Pal Singh, Advs. versus ..... Judgement Debtor Through Mr. Satvik Varma, Mr.Lalltaksh Joshi and Mr.Tanveer Oberio, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. Both these executions have been filed by the respective decree holders seeking to execute the judgment and decree of this court dated 15.12.2017. I may note that the decree dated 15.12.2017 was passed based on the settlement between the parties recorded in court on 31.08.2017. The recorded settlement between the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-18-2018
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2020 OF2013LT. COL. VIJAYNATH JHA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.We have heard the appellant appearing in-person and Shri Sandeep Sethi, learned Additional Solicitor General for India.2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant questioning the judgment and order dated 23.08.2012 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow by which O.A.No.104 of 2011 filed by the appellant has been rejected as not maintainable and 2 returned to the appellant with liberty to file the same before the concerned authority.3. Brief facts of the case necessary to be noted for deciding the issues raised in the appeal are: The appellant was commissioned in the Indian Army on 11.03.1989 in the Engineering Discipline. The appellant was subsequently selected and inducted in the Directorate General of Quality Assurance (DGQA) from 31.05.2004. On completion ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-16-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A.780 /2002 Reserved on:3. d May, 2018 Decision on:16th May, 2018 RAJBIR .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.P. Kaushal, Mr. Amit Wahi, Mr. Sachin Kumar and Mr. Ravinder Mahender Advocates. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ....Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for State. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 10th September, 2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) arising out of FIR No.566/1998 registered at Police Station (PS) Malviya Nagar, convicting the Appellant for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the order on sentence dated 11th September, 2002 sentencing him to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5,000/-; and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for three months.2. The charge against the Appellant (Accused No.1: A-1)was that he along Crl. A. 780 /2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-09-2018
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.558 OF2012Kalpana Mehta and others Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India and others Respondent(s) WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.921 OF2013JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, CJI. [For himself and A.M. Khanwilkar, J.]. I N D E X Heading Page No.S. No.A. Introduction B. The factual background B.1 The Reference C. Contentions of the petitioners D. Contentions of the respondents E. Supremacy of the Constitution F. Constitutional limitations upon the legislature 3 4 6 8 12 14 17 2 G. Doctrine of separation of powers H. Power of judicial review I. Interpretation of the Constitution The nature of duty cast upon this Court I.1 Interpretation of fundamental rights I.2 Interpretation constitutional provisions of other J.K. A perspective on the role of Parliamentary Committees International position of Parliamentary Committees K.1 Parliamentary Committees in 21 28 34 40 42 48 54 54 England K.2 Parliamentary Committee...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-08-2018
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6785 OF2014EX NAVY DIRECT ENTRY ARTIFICERS ASSOCIATION & ORS. .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT A.K.SIKRI, J.Appellant No.1 is a registered Association of Ex Navy Direct Entry Artificers, whereas appellant Nos. 2 to 5 are Ex Direct Entry Artificers of the Navy. Primarily, it is the cause of appellant Nos. 2 to 5 which is espoused by their Association as well i.e. appellant No.1. These appellant Nos. 2 to 5 have rendered actual service of 10 years. For an Artificer to become entitled to pension, he is supposed to render minimum service of 15 years as per Regulation 78 of the Navy (Pension) Regulations, 1964. The appellants claim that after their initial engagement period of 10 years as Artificers, they were placed in Fleet Reserve for a period of 10 years and as per Regulations, 50% of the period of Reserve is to be counted for the purpose of pension. On t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-07-2018
$~5 & 6 * 5 + 6 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A.333/2018 & Crl.M.(Bail)No.469/2018 HARISH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Prasanna, Ms. Vani Singhal and Mr. Nishant Bhardwaj, Advocates versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for State CRL.A.336/2018 & Crl.M.(Bail)No.474/2018 HARKA @ DEEPAK Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Advocate ..... Appellant versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for State CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA JUDGMENT0705.2018 % 1. These are two appeals against the common judgment dated 13th February 2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Courts, Shahdara convicting both the Appellants for the offence under Section 3IPC and the order on sentence dated 20th February 2018 whereby both the Appellants were sentenced to imprisonment for life and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo CRL.A. 333/2018 & Crl.A.33...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-07-2018
$~5 & 6 * 5 + 6 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A.333/2018 & Crl.M.(Bail)No.469/2018 HARISH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Prasanna, Ms. Vani Singhal and Mr. Nishant Bhardwaj, Advocates versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for State CRL.A.336/2018 & Crl.M.(Bail)No.474/2018 HARKA @ DEEPAK Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Advocate ..... Appellant versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for State CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA JUDGMENT0705.2018 % 1. These are two appeals against the common judgment dated 13th February 2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Courts, Shahdara convicting both the Appellants for the offence under Section 3IPC and the order on sentence dated 20th February 2018 whereby both the Appellants were sentenced to imprisonment for life and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo CRL.A. 333/2018 & Crl.A.33...
Tag this Judgment!