Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: pepsu court of wards act 2008 bk Court: delhi Page 7 of about 350 results (0.125 seconds)

Aug 24 2018 (HC)

Dharambir @ Illa & Ors. Vs.the State (Nct of Delhi)

Court : Delhi

..... for the original complainants/appellants in crl.a.139/2012, submitted as under: (i) the defence has for the first time submitted in this court that the poa act would not be applicable since the incident in question was merely a quarrel between two groups, the members of each of which happened to belong ..... and there dr. dinesh kumar prajapat, medical officer met me and told me that patient tara chand was lying at bed no.6 of the emergency ward. thereafter i proceeded towards bed no.6 dr. dinesh kumar prajapat has given certificate regarding fitness of tara chand to make his statement. thereafter i recorded ..... of assam (2002) 10 scc277and crl.a. 129/2012 & connected matters page 39 of 209 kazem sk. @ kamruzzaman @ kazeman v. state of w.b. 2008 cri lj4474(db-cal) wherein it was held that an omission to mention a fact in the statement under section 161 cr pc cannot be said to be a ..... not to be given primacy. reference is made to the decisions in state of m.p. v. dharkole (2004) 13 scc308 ram swaroop v. state of rajasthan (2008) 13 scc crl.a. 129/2012 & connected matters page 38 of 209 515; and mallappa siddappa alakanur v. state of karnataka (2009) 14 scc748 (viii) ..... 209 pandurang chandrakant mhatre v. state of maharashtra (2009) 10 scc773 md. ankoos v. public prosecutor, high court of a.p. (supra); mukteshwar rai v. state of bihar air1992sc483 state of a.p. v. rayaneedi sitharamaiah (2008) 16 scc179 musakhan v. state of maharashtra (1977) 1 scc733 and ramappa halappa pujar v. state of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 24 2018 (HC)

Ramphal & Anr. Vs.the State (Nct of Delhi)

Court : Delhi

..... for the original complainants/appellants in crl.a.139/2012, submitted as under: (i) the defence has for the first time submitted in this court that the poa act would not be applicable since the incident in question was merely a quarrel between two groups, the members of each of which happened to belong ..... and there dr. dinesh kumar prajapat, medical officer met me and told me that patient tara chand was lying at bed no.6 of the emergency ward. thereafter i proceeded towards bed no.6 dr. dinesh kumar prajapat has given certificate regarding fitness of tara chand to make his statement. thereafter i recorded ..... of assam (2002) 10 scc277and crl.a. 129/2012 & connected matters page 39 of 209 kazem sk. @ kamruzzaman @ kazeman v. state of w.b. 2008 cri lj4474(db-cal) wherein it was held that an omission to mention a fact in the statement under section 161 cr pc cannot be said to be a ..... not to be given primacy. reference is made to the decisions in state of m.p. v. dharkole (2004) 13 scc308 ram swaroop v. state of rajasthan (2008) 13 scc crl.a. 129/2012 & connected matters page 38 of 209 515; and mallappa siddappa alakanur v. state of karnataka (2009) 14 scc748 (viii) ..... 209 pandurang chandrakant mhatre v. state of maharashtra (2009) 10 scc773 md. ankoos v. public prosecutor, high court of a.p. (supra); mukteshwar rai v. state of bihar air1992sc483 state of a.p. v. rayaneedi sitharamaiah (2008) 16 scc179 musakhan v. state of maharashtra (1977) 1 scc733 and ramappa halappa pujar v. state of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 24 2018 (HC)

State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr. Vs.kulwinder & Ors.

Court : Delhi

..... for the original complainants/appellants in crl.a.139/2012, submitted as under: (i) the defence has for the first time submitted in this court that the poa act would not be applicable since the incident in question was merely a quarrel between two groups, the members of each of which happened to belong ..... and there dr. dinesh kumar prajapat, medical officer met me and told me that patient tara chand was lying at bed no.6 of the emergency ward. thereafter i proceeded towards bed no.6 dr. dinesh kumar prajapat has given certificate regarding fitness of tara chand to make his statement. thereafter i recorded ..... of assam (2002) 10 scc277and crl.a. 129/2012 & connected matters page 39 of 209 kazem sk. @ kamruzzaman @ kazeman v. state of w.b. 2008 cri lj4474(db-cal) wherein it was held that an omission to mention a fact in the statement under section 161 cr pc cannot be said to be a ..... not to be given primacy. reference is made to the decisions in state of m.p. v. dharkole (2004) 13 scc308 ram swaroop v. state of rajasthan (2008) 13 scc crl.a. 129/2012 & connected matters page 38 of 209 515; and mallappa siddappa alakanur v. state of karnataka (2009) 14 scc748 (viii) ..... 209 pandurang chandrakant mhatre v. state of maharashtra (2009) 10 scc773 md. ankoos v. public prosecutor, high court of a.p. (supra); mukteshwar rai v. state of bihar air1992sc483 state of a.p. v. rayaneedi sitharamaiah (2008) 16 scc179 musakhan v. state of maharashtra (1977) 1 scc733 and ramappa halappa pujar v. state of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 24 2018 (HC)

State & Anr. Vs.jasbir @ Lillu

Court : Delhi

..... for the original complainants/appellants in crl.a.139/2012, submitted as under: (i) the defence has for the first time submitted in this court that the poa act would not be applicable since the incident in question was merely a quarrel between two groups, the members of each of which happened to belong ..... and there dr. dinesh kumar prajapat, medical officer met me and told me that patient tara chand was lying at bed no.6 of the emergency ward. thereafter i proceeded towards bed no.6 dr. dinesh kumar prajapat has given certificate regarding fitness of tara chand to make his statement. thereafter i recorded ..... of assam (2002) 10 scc277and crl.a. 129/2012 & connected matters page 39 of 209 kazem sk. @ kamruzzaman @ kazeman v. state of w.b. 2008 cri lj4474(db-cal) wherein it was held that an omission to mention a fact in the statement under section 161 cr pc cannot be said to be a ..... not to be given primacy. reference is made to the decisions in state of m.p. v. dharkole (2004) 13 scc308 ram swaroop v. state of rajasthan (2008) 13 scc crl.a. 129/2012 & connected matters page 38 of 209 515; and mallappa siddappa alakanur v. state of karnataka (2009) 14 scc748 (viii) ..... 209 pandurang chandrakant mhatre v. state of maharashtra (2009) 10 scc773 md. ankoos v. public prosecutor, high court of a.p. (supra); mukteshwar rai v. state of bihar air1992sc483 state of a.p. v. rayaneedi sitharamaiah (2008) 16 scc179 musakhan v. state of maharashtra (1977) 1 scc733 and ramappa halappa pujar v. state of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2015 (HC)

Mahipal Singh Vs. State

Court : Delhi

..... complaint, has no merit either. a similar argument was raised by the appellant in raj kumar v. state, crl. appeal no.831/2008, decided on 26.03.2015 by this court. the said submission was rejected by observing as follows: the submission of mr. krishnan that gurander singh (pw-7) was a stock ..... the offence punishable under sections (u/s) 7 and 13(1)(d) of the prevention of corruption act, 1988 ( pc act ) punishable under section 13(2) pc act. by the order on sentence dated 04.04.2008, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (ri) for a period of three years along with ..... proceeding against a real bribe taker and that an officer with integrity is not harassed unnecessarily.12. the evidence of such a witness as pw4 can be acted on even without the help of any corroboration vide prakash chand v. state (delhi administration), (1979) 2 scr30and hazari lal v. delhi administration,(1980 ..... 162 of the code?. as stated before, a previous statement of a witness complying with the conditions laid down in section 157 of the evidence act b admissible. the exception is that if it fulfills the two conditions laid down in section 162 of the code, it becomes inadmissible thereunder, except ..... from the facts & circumstances & statements of witness & complainant as above, asi mahipal singh has committed offence u/s 7 & 13 of p.o.c. act, 1988. the rukka for registration of case is being sent through ct. mahinder singh no.1205/n in maruti van. after registration of case investigation he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 2014 (HC)

Delhi Development Authority Vs. H L Sharma

Court : Delhi

..... scc597 ram kumar vs. state of haryana, (1987) scc supp 582; as well as division bench judgment of this court in delhi development authority vs. k.p. garg, (w.p. (c.) no.8151/2008 decided on 05.11.2009). it was contended that these authorities have categorically ruled that, in such circumstances, the disciplinary ..... given sufficient explanation - i.e that after the quashing of the charge sheet and penalty imposed upon sh. varshney, the executive engineer, the validation act was made in 1998, and subsequently he retired from service and later he died in 2002. in these circumstances, no steps could be taken to inquire ..... nevertheless what was completely overlooked was that after the quashing of the charge sheet and penalty imposed upon sh. varshney, the executive engineer, the validation act was made in 1998. after being reinstated, he retired from service and later died in 2002. in these circumstances, no steps could be taken to ..... used in the construction.7. it was submitted that given the findings recorded by the inquiry officer, which were clear as to the culpability and acts of and omissions of the applicant, it ought not to have quashed the penalty order on the narrow ground that the disciplinary authority did not ..... i.e. lpa no.171/1999 was taken up for hearing, and allowed on 17.05.2011. the division bench, taking note of the validation act, set aside the order of the learned single judge and remitted the matter for consideration.4. in this background, the cat by order dated 23.01 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 2014 (HC)

Delhi Development Authority Vs. H L Sharma

Court : Delhi

..... scc597 ram kumar vs. state of haryana, (1987) scc supp 582; as well as division bench judgment of this court in delhi development authority vs. k.p. garg, (w.p. (c.) no.8151/2008 decided on 05.11.2009). it was contended that these authorities have categorically ruled that, in such circumstances, the disciplinary ..... given sufficient explanation - i.e that after the quashing of the charge sheet and penalty imposed upon sh. varshney, the executive engineer, the validation act was made in 1998, and subsequently he retired from service and later he died in 2002. in these circumstances, no steps could be taken to inquire ..... nevertheless what was completely overlooked was that after the quashing of the charge sheet and penalty imposed upon sh. varshney, the executive engineer, the validation act was made in 1998. after being reinstated, he retired from service and later died in 2002. in these circumstances, no steps could be taken to ..... used in the construction.7. it was submitted that given the findings recorded by the inquiry officer, which were clear as to the culpability and acts of and omissions of the applicant, it ought not to have quashed the penalty order on the narrow ground that the disciplinary authority did not ..... i.e. lpa no.171/1999 was taken up for hearing, and allowed on 17.05.2011. the division bench, taking note of the validation act, set aside the order of the learned single judge and remitted the matter for consideration.4. in this background, the cat by order dated 23.01 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 28 2018 (HC)

Suman Devi & Anr vs.mahesh Arora & Anr (Reliance General Insurace Co L ...

Court : Delhi

..... of the witness?s testimony in light of all the evidence in the case. 13.14.3 civil jury instructions, state of connecticut, united states (2008). ?2.5-1 credibility of witnesses the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony are matters for you as jurors to determine ..... the same are reproduced as under:-"13.14.1 civil jury instructions for philadelphia, united states (2010). ?1.5 preliminary instructions evidence the district courts of you should use your common sense in weighing the evidence. consider it in light of your everyday experience with people and events, and give it ..... to render it unworthy of belief...? (emphasis supplied) 13.13.6 in bundhoo lall v. joy coomar, manu/wb/ 0198/1882, the calcutta high court explained the intention of the legislature in using the words matters before it instead of evidence in section 3 as under: 12. it would appear, therefore, ..... impossible for the accused to be after committing the murder, was given in evidence, and though the murder resulted in conviction, the difficulty of the court in coming to a decision to convict can well be judged. questions of this nature can never be solved by any artificial rules of evidence, ..... 5 nothing can be said to be ?proved?, however much material there may be available, until the court believes the fact to exist or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man will act under the supposition that it exists. for example, ten witnesses may say that they saw the sun rising .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 2017 (HC)

Saroj Aggarwal and Anr. Vs.shakuntala Aggarwal

Court : Delhi

..... , advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. with the consent of the parties, the matter was heard finally. during the course of hearing, the court had suggested the directions given in the impugned order could be that maintained subject to certain modifications. this was acceptable to both parties. the impugned order is ..... defendant was not granted any permission to construct or complete the finishing of the balance floors and by the order dated 19.03.2015, this court had also directed that the basement, ground and second floors be sealed. the contention that defendant be permitted to occupy the suit property since she ..... till the final disposal of the suit. the defendant shall also not occupy any portion of the suit property without seeking prior permission of this court. so far the order dated 7.4.2011 restraining the defendant from carrying out further construction over the suit property is concerned, it is hereby ..... co- ownership as well as claiming that the suit property was given to her as per the oral family settlement having taken place in the year 2008, as opposed to cs(os) 617/2011 page 6 of 14 what she avers in the written statement that the family settlement took place in ..... defendant had filed an application under order xxxix rule 4 cpc seeking vacation of the said order. after hearing extensive arguments on two occasions, this court passed an order dated 07.01.2013. the relevant extract of the order reads as under:-""26. i have heard learned counsel for the parties .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 2019 (HC)

Sukumar Chand Jain vs.dda

Court : Delhi

..... to the ee raising seven claims amounting to `21,85,000. the dispute was referred to arbitration, on the intervention of this court, under section 11(6) of the act. the preliminary objection to limitation was rejected by the tribunal, which then went on to decide the merits.21. quite apart from ..... ltd., (2006) 11 scc181and renusagar power co. ltd. v. general electric co. 1984 (4) scc679. in mc dermott international (supra), the supreme court clarified the court's inherent limitation by reason of section 34 in such matters:"112. it is trite that the terms of the contract can be express or implied. the ..... learned single judge has re-appreciated evidence and given findings of fact which are outside the purview of section 34 of the act. it is settled law that a court does not sit in appeal over the award of an arbitral tribunal by reassessing or re-appreciating the evidence and the ..... govt of nct s (hereafter called nct ) petition under section 34 to an award dated 17.03.2008 passed by the learned sole arbitrator in the dispute between the parties.20. like in the other two cases, the contract was for execution of works ..... gsc and urged that the learned single judge could not be faulted for following boghara polyfab (supra) and master construction (supra), which are binding on all courts. fao5582012 19. the appellant (hereafter kuber ) challenges the judgment and order of the learned single judge, dated 10.09.2012, which allowed the respondent .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //