Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Page 10 of about 742,450 results (2.220 seconds)

Nov 08 2019 (HC)

Mohd Yunus vs.state & Anr.

Court : Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:28. 08.2019 % Judgment delivered on:08. 11.2019 + CRL.M.C. 3861/2010 MOHD YUNUS ........ Petitioner Through: Mohd. Saleem, Ms. Anjle Gupta and Mr. Asim Naeem, Advocates. versus STATE & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. G. M. Farooqui, for APP the State with Inspector Anil Jindal and SI Neeraj Kumar from PS-EOW. Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel for DDA with Ms. Komal Sorout and Ms. Gauri Chaturvedi, Advocates for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI JUDGMENT BRIJESH SETHI, J.1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner Mohd. Yunus under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of the FIR No.CRL.M.C. 3861/2010 Page 1 of 16 247/1988 dated 22.11.1988, under Section 420/468/471/120-B IPC registered at P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi and charge- sheet filed there under against him.2. Concisely, the relevant facts of the present case are that President of India (Lessor) through New Friends Cooperative House Build...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 2019 (HC)

Nalini Sharma vs.honble Lt. Governor & Ors.

Court : Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:28. 08.2019 % Judgment delivered on:08. 11.2019 + W.P.(CRL) CRL.M.A. 33381/2019 1330/2009 & CRL.M.A.4228/2017 and NALINI SHARMA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Prakash Gautam and Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocates. versus HONBLE LT. GOVERNOR & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. G. M. Farooqui, APP for the State with Inspector Anil Jindal and SI Neeraj Kumar from PS-EOW. Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel for DDA with Ms. Komal Sorout and Ms. Gauri Chaturvedi, Advocates for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI JUDGMENT BRIJESH SETHI, J.1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner Nalini Sharma under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of the FIR No.W.P.(CRL) 1330/2009 Page 1 of 14 247/1988 dated 22.11.1988, under Section 420/468/471/120-B IPC registered at P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi and charge- sheet filed there under against her.2. Concisely, the relevant facts of the present case are that President of ...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2019 (SC)

Daya Ram Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1522 OF2009DAYARAM & ANOTHER APPELLANT Versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH RESPONDENT JUDGMENT INDU MALHOTRA, J.1. The appellants have filed the present Criminal Appeal to challenge the order of conviction under Section 302, IPC and sentence of Life Imprisonment passed vide Judgment and Order dated 04.12.2008 by the Jabalpur Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Criminal Appeal No.206/1994. The High Court has affirmed the Judgment passed by the Sessions Court. 1 2. The present appeal arises out of FIR No.86/1991 lodged on 19.12.1991 at 4:20 p.m. under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307 read with 34 IPC by the deceased Ghansu himself. Ghansu, in his F.I.R, stated that on 19.12.1991 he had gone to Ishanagar Police Station to file a Report against appellant No.1 Dayaram Yadav for having beaten his son Chandu. On his way back from the Police Station, at about 3:00 p.m., near Nahar ki Puliya, both the...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2019 (SC)

Union of India Vs. V.r.nanukuttan Nair

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4714-4715 OF2012UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....APPELLANT(S) V.R. NANUKUTTAN NAIR .....RESPONDENT(S) VERSUS JUDGMENT HEMANT GUPTA, J.1)2) The challenge in the present appeals is to the orders passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi1 on 26th October, 2010 and April 12, 2011 holding that the respondent2 is entitled to service element of disability pension from the date of discharge. The facts in brief are that the applicant was discharged on 30th June, 1978 after completion of 10 years and 169 days of service. He was in low medical category since 1970. He was granted disability pension @50% on account of suffering from Viral Myocarditis post discharge, but the applicant was denied the benefit of service element of disability pension. It is the denial of this service element which led the applicant to invoke the 1 2 for short, Tribunal hereinafter referred to as the applicant 13) 4)5) jur...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2019 (SC)

The State of Uttarakhand Vs. Darshan Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1856 OF2013STATE OF UTTARAKHAND ... APPELLANT VERSUS DARSHAN SINGH ... RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1857 OF2013JUDGMENT K.M. JOSEPH, J.1. Since these appeals involve the same impugned judgment of the High Court acquitting the respondents of offences under Section 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the IPC, for short), we deem it fit to dispose of the same by a common judgment. 1 PROSECUTION CASE IN BRIEF2 The complaint in this case, which led to the trial, was lodged by one Swarn Singh-PW1. The complaint in brief is as follows: On 22.08.1992, when he, along with his father, mother and maternal uncle, were going on a tractor from Nanakmatta to their village and his father was driving the tractor, when the tractor reached one kilometre from their house, they found that a bullock cart has blocked their passage. The tractor stopped near the bullock...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2019 (SC)

Indian Oil Corporation Vs. M/S. r.m. Service Centre

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8257 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.25746 OF2018 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. & ORS. .....APPELLANT(S) M/S. R.M. SERVICE CENTRE & ANR. .....RESPONDENT(S) VERSUS JUDGMENT HEMANT GUPTA, J.1)2) The challenge in the present appeal is to an order of the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court passed in writ appeal on 20th February, 2018 maintaining an order of the Single Bench of the High Court whereby termination of dealership of respondent No.11 for violation of Marketing Discipline Guidelines, 20122 was set aside. The dealer was granted retail dealership for sale of motor spirit (petrol), High Speed Diesel, motor oil and grease as a physical 1 2 for short, dealer for short, Guidelines 1 disabled person on a depot located at Ghograpar, National Highway -31 in the District of Nalbari, Assam. The sale and supply from the retail outlet of the dealer was suspended by the appellants on 6th May, 2013 whe...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2019 (SC)

M/S Shaf Broadcast Pvt Ltd Vs. Doordarshan a Constituent of Prasar Bha ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION No.36 OF2019M/S. SHAF BROADCAST PVT. LTD. PETITIONER VERSUS DOORDARSHAN A CONSTITUENT OF PRASAR BHARTI & ANR. RESPONDENTS ORDER INDU MALHOTRA, J.1. The Petitioner has filed an Application under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an Arbitrator on behalf of Respondent No.1 Doordarshan, in an international commercial arbitration. 2 2. The Petitioner Company and Respondent No.2 entered into a Contract dated 08.03.2010 with Respondent No.1 Doordarshan. The Contract contains an arbitration clause, which reads as under : (Indian) 8.2 Arbitration: In the case of dispute arising upon or in relation to or in connection with the Contract between HB and the Entity, which has not been settled amicably, any Party can refer the dispute for Arbitration under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Such disputes shall be referred to an Arbitral Tribunal consisting on...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2019 (SC)

Manoharan Vs. State by Inspector of Police, Variety Hall Police Statio ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA INHERENT JURISDICTION REPORTABLE REVIEW PETITION (CRL.) NOS. 446-447 OF2019IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1174-1175 OF2019Manoharan ..... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State by Inspector of Police, Variety Hall Police Station, Coimbatore .....RESPONDENT(S) SURYA KANT, J.JUDGMENT These review petitions are directed against the judgment dated 01.08.2019 passed in Manoharan v. State by Inspector of Police1, wherein this three-Judge Bench had affirmed conviction of the accused Manoharan for offences punishable under Sections 302, 376(2)(f) and (g) and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (in short IPC) and by majority upheld the death sentence confirmed by the High Court. FACTUAL MATRIX Brief facts of the present case are as follows:2. 1 (2019) 7 SCC716 Page 1 X, a ten-year-old girl and Y, her 7-year-old brother were enrolled in Classes V and II respectively in a private school at Coimbatore and would commute around 7:45 a.m. in a pickup vehicle owned by one Kartikeyan (PW-2). On 29....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2019 (SC)

Kalu @ Laxminarayan Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh Home Department Se ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1677 OF2010KALU alias LAXMINARAYAN ..........APPELLANT(S) STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ......RESPONDENT(S) VERSUS JUDGMENT NAVIN SINHA, J.The appellant, husband of the deceased, is aggrieved by his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC) affirmed by the High Court. There is no eye witness and the case rests only on circumstantial evidence.2. The deceased was married to the appellant approximately six to seven years back. Both of them were living alone in the house with their minor child. On 14.10.1994, late in the evening, the family members of the deceased, who resided about 3540 kms. 1 away, received a telephone call that their daughter had died. They came the next morning at 06.00 AM and found the body of the deceased in the middle room of the house, lying on the ground covered with a white sheet. The first information report was lodged at about 07.00 AM, the inquest ...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 2019 (SC)

M/S Vijay Trading Vs. Central Warehousing Corporation

Court : Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NO.655 OF2016M/S VIJAY TRADING AND TRANSPORT COMPANY ...Appellant VERSUS CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION Respondent JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.This appeal arises out of the impugned judgment dated 19.07.2010 passed by the High Court of Delhi in FAO(OS) No.435 of 2010 in and by which the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant thereby upholding the judgment of the learned Single Judge thereby affirming the dismissal of the objections filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against the arbitral award dated 18.03.2005.2. Brief facts which led to filing of this appeal are as under:- An agreement dated 30.08.2001 was entered into between the respondent-Central Warehousing Corporation and the appellant for a period of two years from 28.08.2001 to 27.08.2003 for carrying 1 out the work of Handling and Transportation at Inland Clearance Depot (ICD), Varanasi. The respond...

Tag this Judgment!


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