Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-18-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on: November 18, 2014 W.P.(C) 7779/2013& CM No.16548/2013 (for stay) M/S NATIONAL HEART INSTITUTE & ANR. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.Satyakam, Advocate with Mr. S.K. Shailly, General Manager ( F & L) of the Petitioners. Versus GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI (LOBOUR) AND ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Dheeraj Kaushik for Ms. Raavi Birbal, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.W.P.(C) No.7779/2013 1. The present petition is directed against the order dated 06.09.2013, whereby the Learned Tribunal dismissed the application filed by the petitioners under Section 151 CPC.2. Brief facts of the case are that vide order dated 01.04.2010 services of the respondent No.2/workman was terminated after holding a departmental enquiry. Vide order dated 11.11.2009, Under Secretary (Labour) referred the following question to the Labour Court for adjudica...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-18-2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :18. 11.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.S.RAVI Crl.A.(MD)No.245 of 2010 State rep.by Inspector of Police, Peraiyur Police Station, Ramanathapuram District, Crime No.30 of 2008 .. Appellant/Complainant Vs. Guna @ Gunasekaran .. Respondent/Accused Criminal appeal filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. against the Judgment dated 11.01.2010 passed in Sessions Case No.196 of 2008 by the Principal District and Sessions Court, Ramanathapuram. !For Appellant : Mr.K.S.Duraipandian Addl.Public Prosecutor ^For Respondent : Mr.P.Andiraj :JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by A.SELVAM, J.) The Judgment of acquittal passed in Sessions Case No.196 of 2008 dated 11.01.2010 by the Principal District and Sessions Court, Ramanathapuram is being challenged in the present Criminal Appeal.2. The consistent case of the prosecution is that in North street, Ramanathapuram both the accused and deceased Far...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur
Decided on : Nov-18-2014
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR : ORDER : S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3324/2005 Natwar Lal & Ors. Vs. Shri Prahlad Singh & Ors. Date of Order ::18. 11.2014 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr. Arpit Bhoot, for the petitioner/s. Mr. S.P. Sharma, for the respondent/s. ---- BY THE COURT: This writ petition is directed against the order dated 8.10.2004 passed by the trial court whereby the application filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs seeking amendment in the plaint has been rejected. The facts in brief may be noticed thus : the petitioners filed a suit for possession, damages and permanent injunction against Prahlad Singh and Dalpat Singh regarding property known as 'Shahji Ka Bagicha' situated at Ward No.8, Kuchaman City. It was inter-alia claimed that the Western portion of the property was on rent with Nobal Senior Secondary School, about 1/2 Eastern portion is on rent with Commercial Taxes Department and Sheep & Wool Department and 1/2 Southern po...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-25-2014
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.10529 OF2014(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.11696 OF2007 SRI SIDHHARTH VIYAS & ANR. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS RAVI NATH MISRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and Order dated 7th May, 2007 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Civil Side in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.47201 of 2002.3. The question for consideration is whether Section 12(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (for short ".the Act".) providing for 'deemed vacancy' is applicable to a situation where the tenant or a member of his family builds, acquires or otherwise gets a vacant building in the area concerned after commencement of the tenancy but prior to application of the Act to the tenancy in question.4. Brief reference to facts giving rise to the question is necessary...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-27-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. No.344 of 2014 Reserved on: November 18, 2014 Delivered on: November 27, 2014 FIROZ KHAN Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Arundhati Katju and Mr. Himanshu Suman, Advocates versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP SI Govind Singh, PS: Uttam Nagar, Delhi WITH CRL.A. No.798 of 2014 NEWAL KUMAR PANDEY ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Vikas Padora, Advocate versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP SI Govind Singh, PS: Uttam Nagar, Delhi AND CRL.A. No.637 of 2014 SHAHZAD HUSSAIN Through: ..... Appellant Mr. D.B. Yadav, Advocate versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP SI Govind Singh, PS: Uttam Nagar, Delhi CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2711.2014 1. These appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 7th November 2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in SC No.378/1/10 convicting the three Appellants for th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-31-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:31. t October, 2014 % + I.A. No.12386/2011 in CS(OS) 1911/2011 BRIJ MOHAN BHATIA Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Rajiv Singh Pilania, Adv. with Mr.Lalit Kumar, Adv. versus JAIN SALES CORPORATION & ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr.Sumant De, Adv. with Mr.A.K.Mehta, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The present suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of registered trademarks, copyrights, delivery up, rendition of accounts of profits, damages etc. has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendants in respect of trademark Flexilam Nomex. Alongwith the suit, plaintiff also filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC being I.A. 12386/2011.2. Summons were issued in the suit and notices in the application to the defendants on 8th August, 2011. After hearing, detailed exparte order was passed against the defendants restraining them from using the name Fle...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 03, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: November10, 2014 % + CRL.A. 804/2014 SUNIL @ BABU Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.P.S.Pradhan, Advocate. versus STATE Represented by: + ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Yashpal Singh, Crime Branch and SI Gorav. Mr.Rajeev Nanda, Advocate for deceaseds father. CRL.A. 854/2014 VINOD @ VINODI Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms.Nandita Rao, Advocate. versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Yashpal Singh, Crime Branch and SI Gorav. Mr.Rajeev Nanda, Advocate for deceaseds father. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Sunil @ Babu and Vinod @ Vinodi have been convicted for the offence of murder of Jitender vide impugned judgment dated March 26, 2014 and directed to undergo imprisonment for life.2. Learned counsels for the appellants assa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 03, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: November10, 2014 % + CRL.A. 804/2014 SUNIL @ BABU Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.P.S.Pradhan, Advocate. versus STATE Represented by: + ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Yashpal Singh, Crime Branch and SI Gorav. Mr.Rajeev Nanda, Advocate for deceaseds father. CRL.A. 854/2014 VINOD @ VINODI Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms.Nandita Rao, Advocate. versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Yashpal Singh, Crime Branch and SI Gorav. Mr.Rajeev Nanda, Advocate for deceaseds father. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Sunil @ Babu and Vinod @ Vinodi have been convicted for the offence of murder of Jitender vide impugned judgment dated March 26, 2014 and directed to undergo imprisonment for life.2. Learned counsels for the appellants assa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-28-2014
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.420 OF2012SURESH & ANR. ..... APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ..... RESPONDENT JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL J.1. This appeal has been preferred against conviction and sentence of the appellants under Sections 302 read with Sections 34, 364-A, 201 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.2. Case of the prosecution is that on 18th December, 2000, the deceased Devender Chopra and his son deceased Abhishek Chopra had left their factory for their house in D.L.F., Gurgaon but did not reach their house. At about 9.41 P.M., PW-12 Pooja Chopra, daughter of Devender Chopra gave a call to her father to find out as to why he was late. She learnt that her father and brother had been kidnapped and ransom of rupees fifty lacs was demanded for their release. She contacted her father's business partner informing him that Devender Chopra and Abhishek Chopra were kidnapped and the kidnappers had demanded a ransom a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: December 02, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 05, 2014 % + CRL.A. 1048/2014 RAJU Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.K.Singhal, Adv. with appellant in person. Versus STATE Represented by: .... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP with Insp.Rajesh Kumar, PS Swaroop Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Raju was charged for committing the murder of Smt.Shashi Rai and firing upon Ajay thus causing bullet injuries on his person in furtherance of common intention with one A a juvenile. Vide impugned judgment dated July 16, 2014 the learned Trial Court has convicted Raju for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC, 307/34 IPC and 25 Arms Act and has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine in sum of `50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine in sum of `50,000/- for...
Tag this Judgment!