201, Nitika Tower-1, Commercial Complex, Azadpur, Delhi-110033
+91-99811543702

Publication/Reported Cases

A Few Published/ Reported Cases

PIL (Public Interest Litigation)

Mr. S.S. Dahiya has filed a PIL against selling of Books and stationery in Schools and mandating parents to purchase from their only. These malpractice at one hand  put financial burden on parents and the other hand prohibit the free market operation and promoting the monopoly of few Book Servers only.

 

Criminal Case (Women Harassment)

FIR U/S 509 and 354B

PIL (Public Interest Litigation)

He has filed a PIL against 25 Judges of Punjab & Haryana High Court for who took Mass Leave. Successful litigation which is reported in several Law Journals and published in many newspapers.

Marriage [Protection Case]

He has filed a Protection case on behalf of couple who got married secretly and  girl’s father threaten them to kill.  

Service/ Employment

Mr. S.S. Dahiya has filed this case in which starting point of service is calculation which has a direct impact on Pension. This case is reported in several Law Journals.

Criminal Case

Mr. S.S. Dahiya has filed a case in which charges are not framed even after 13 years.

Divorce  (in one Day)

Mr. S.S. Dahiya has filed a case in which divorce is granted in one day.

Service/ Employment

Mr. S.S. Dahiya has filed this case in which compensation amount in case of retrenchment. this case was reported in several Law Journals.

Civil  [ Impounding of Vehicle]

Mr. S.S. Dahiya has filed a case in Supreme Court of India who by it order directed that only S.P. or above rank officer can impound the vehicle.

Divorce 

Mr. S.S. Dahiya has filed a case in  Supreme Court of India who has rejected the case pleas of wife for living togethere wherein case of divorce was going on from past 25 years. 

Criminal [ Bail in Rape Case]

Mr. S. S. Dahiya has filed a bail application in Rape case and which was granted after convict married victim.

Civil Case [ Demolition]

Mr. S. S. Dahiya has filed a against the Cantonment Board for demolition of house order. 

Criminal Case [Murder]

Madan Mohan Vs. State (Suspension of sentence granted by the Supreme court in attempt to Murder case, where it was not  proved by the prosecution that which injury was inflicted whereby death would have caused)

Service/Employment

Sonepat Co-operative Bank case contested in Supreme Court where the employee was left the service without intimation to the Bank his reinstatement was directed by the High court. But, Supreme Court said it was the fault of employee, who cannot be reinstated.

Income Tax 

Delhi State Co-operative Bank Limited case where the Income Tax Authority Directed the Reserve Bank of India to remit the amount of Rs.1.76 crore to Income Tax Department wherein the stay was obtained form High Court Special Bench.

Criminal Case [Murder]

Amar Pal Singh Vs. Allahabad High Court case related to expunge of remark against the Judicial officer in Lower courts. The Supreme Court held that this type of remark should not be imposed by the High court otherwise the Judicial officer has to work as sword is hanging on their head. The fact the CJM Bulandshar dismissed the complainant of the complainant at the preliminary state of Attempt to murder case. 

Civil Case [Land]

Subhash Chand Vs. Gaini Ram the latest decision on the Delhi land Reform Act by Delhi High Court wherein the court held that if the suit is filed in the civil court and some relief’s which can be decided by the Civil court and the suit was to be filed before the revenue court then the civil court has to grant the reliefs which have been sought falls within the ambit of Civil Court. The Hatti Case was discussed at length of Supreme Court.

Civil Case [Rent]

Khem Chand Gupta Vs. J. Samanta Mach. Pvt. Ltd. Wherein the rent was deposited by the tenant in the civil court but in pursuance to the Judgment of the Supreme court in Atma Ram Case the rent has to be deposited in under Delhi Rent Control Act i.e. u/s 27 only.

Criminal Case [Murder]

Deepak Malviya case of Murder of a Taxi Driver recover of pistol and other evidence could not establish reason thereof that the finger print of on the car were tally. The question of taken of finger print was not established reason thereof the witness who took the photograph said that the vehicle was laying open in the Police station. Moreover, suggestion was given that the fingers were taken after the arrest of the accused reason thereof the vehicle was laying open in the Police station. It was the case of circumstantial Evidence which the prosecution has failed to prove.   

Criminal Case [Suicide]

State Vs. Ritu Sareen case in which the suicide by the father-in-law of the accused. The prosecution has failed to prove the ingredient of section 306 IPC whereby the accused had not instigated the father-in-law to do such act or not created such an atmosphere. So, that it would have given him to commit suicide. Accused acquitted.

Civil Case [ Tort ]

Shree Shayam Salt Industries Vs. National Insurance Company in this the national commission directed the insurance company to pay the amount of damage which had been caused by way of un-seasonal rain in the state of Gujarat.

Civil Case [ Property ]

Sunil Devi Vs. Daya Chand in this case the decree was passed for the recover of the possession of the property but during the pendency of the suit the properties in the locality were re-numbered by the MCD which saving the old number. The decree- holder stated that this property has been re-number as the number mentioned in the Decree but could not produce any evidence. So it has become un-executable decree.

S.S.DAHIYA & CO. (Advocates)

Chamber: G-04, Lawyers Chamber, 30 D.D.U Marg, Rouse Avenue, Delhi-110001

Off: 201, Nitika Tower- 1,  Commercial Complex, Azadpur  Delhi-110033

Email: [email protected]

M:  9811543702, 011-27681491