Delhi Court November 2012 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sudhir Kumar JaIn and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
$~ 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:7. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 153/2010 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant Through Mr.Manoj Ranjan Sinha, Advocate versus SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN & ANR. ..... Respondent Through Mr. S.S. Jain, Advocate for the Respondents No.1 & 2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. This Appeal is directed against a judgment dated 30.04.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of `10,02,000/- was awarded in favour of the Respondents No.1 and 2 for the death of Archit Jain, a Software Engineer and a bachelor, aged 24 years at the time of the accident.2. The finding on negligence is not challenged by the Appellant Insurance Company. Thus the same has attained finality.3. The only ground of challenge raised in the instant Appeal is that the salary certificate placed on record before the Claims Tribunal was forged and thus the same should not have...
Dr.(Smt) Rk Arora Vs. Govt of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
$~42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:07.11.2012 + W.P.(C) 7071/2012 DR.(SMT) RK ARORA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.P.P.Khurana, Senior Advocate with Ms.Tamali Wad, Advocate. Versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Vinod Wadhwa, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr.Parvinder Chauhan, Standing Counsel for Respondent No.2. Mr.Arun Birbal, Advocate for Respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM No. 18301/2012 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 7071/2012 1. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner is seeking reliefs as under:(a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the Respondents to produce the service records of the petitioner as well as records pertaining to order not D/798/DY.-Dir(Admn.)/2012 dated 7th August, 2012 issued by the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (erstwhile S...
Sanjeev Chawla Vs. Sunita Chawla and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
$~ 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:7. h November, 2012 + CM(M). 269/2010 SANJEEV CHAWLA Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Rabin Majumdar, Advocate versus SUNITA CHAWLA & ORS. Through ..... Respondent Mr. Chander Shekhar, Advocate for the Respondent No.1. Mr. Mahesh Chaudhary with Ms. Geeta Vohra, Advocate for the Respondents No.2 to 8. Mr. K.R. Chawla with Mr. Arvind Varma, Advocate for the Respondents No.9 & 10. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Petitioner impugns an order dated 11.01.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-06(West), Delhi whereby an Application under Order 1 Rule 10(2) Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) moved by the Petitioner for being impleaded as a party in Suit No.154/2006 titled Sunita Chawla v. The Group Head, Global Trust Bank & Ors. pending in the Court of the Additional District Judge, Delhi was dismissed.2. Before coming to the Application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC and the impugned or...
Suraj Mal Vs. Punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
$~27 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:07.11.2012 + W.P.(C) 2331/2011 SURAJ MAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.K.G.Mishra, Advocate with Petitioner in person. Versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Ankur Mittal, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner joined the respondent Bank on 16.04.1985 as Armed Guard. On 16.08.2010, the respondent Bank issued a Circular No.8/10 dated 16.08.2010 giving second pension option to its working employees as well as to its retired employees and as per para 3(A) of the said pension circular, the petitioner, being working employee, was entitled to the second pension option.2. For convenience, the said para 3(A) is quoted below:3. In terms of Settlement/Joint Note dated 27th April 2010, another option for joining the existing Pension Scheme shall be extended to:(A) EMPLOYEE/OFFICERS WHO WERE IN THE SERVICE OF THE BANK PRIOR TO 29TH SEPTEMBER 199 AND CONTINUED TO...
Ram Bahal Bharti Vs. Amit Etc
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
$~ 4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:7. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 324/2009 RAM BAHAL BHARTI Through ..... Appellant Mr.Jatinder Kamra, Advocate versus AMIT ETC Through ..... Respondents Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Advocate for the Respondent No.3 Insurance Company CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appeal is directed against a judgment dated 21.01.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby while awarding a compensation of `7,40,326/-, the Respondent No.3 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. was exonerated of its liability to pay the compensation on the ground that the contract of insurance was cancelled because of dishonour of the cheque paid towards the premium.2. There is twin challenge to the judgment. First, the compensation awarded is on the lower side. It is stated that since the Appellant was incapacitated to work and was granted compensation on account of loss of earning capacity to th...
Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Tofa Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
$~ 24 & 39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:7. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 525/2012 HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through Ms.Neerja Sachdeva, Advocate versus TOFA DEVI & ORS. Through + ..... Respondents Mr. Sanjeev Srivastava, Advocate MAC. APP. 1175/2012 TOFA DEVI & ORS. Through ..... Appellants Mr. Sanjeev Srivastava, Advocate versus BABLU SINGH & ORS. Through ..... Respondents Ms.Neerja Sachdeva, Advocate for the Respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CM.APPL.8814/2012(delay) in MAC.APP.525/2012 For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 17 days in filing the Appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. CM.APPL.18973/2012(delay in refiling) & CM. APPL.18972/2012 (delay) in MAC.APP.1175/2012 For the reasons stated in the applications, the delay, if any, in refiling the Appeal and delay of 137 days in filing the Appeal is condoned. The applications stand disposed o...
Raghubir Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:7. h November, 2012 % + TEST. CAS. 79/2008 RAGHUBIR SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Saurabh Tiwari, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.This petition is filed under Section 278 of The Indian Succession Act, 1925 seeking Letters of Administration to the estate of Shri Pradeep Singh, S/o Shri Balbir Singh, R/o M-71, Greater Kailash 1 (Market), New Delhi 110048 who is stated to have died intestate on 10 th November, 2005 leaving behind his mother Mrs. Swaran Kaur, his widow Mrs. Amarjit Kaur and two sons i.e. the petitioner and Shri Jasmeet Singh, as his only legal heirs. The estate qua which Letters of Administration are sought is stated to comprise only of House not LIG-5237 EF, Patiala.2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State through the Standing Counsel, to respondent no.2 and respondent no.3 and also to Chief Revenue Controlling Aut...
Suresh @ Sureshwar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
$~21 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL. A. 789/2011 Decided on 7th November, 2012. SURESH @ SURESHWAR Through: versus ..... Appellant Mr. Ashwani Vij, Adv. STATE ..... Respondent Ms. Fizani Hussain, APP Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.(ORAL) 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26th May, 2011 and order on sentence dated 27th May, 2011 passed by the Trial Court; whereby appellant has been convicted under Section 307 IPC and sentenced to face rigorous imprisonment of five years with fine of `10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Benfit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. has also been given to the appellant.2. Prosecution story, as emerges from the record, is that the appellant was living in the same building as a tenant where PW1 Ram Awtar s/o Ram Babu had been residing along with his brothers PW7 Vinod and PW9Balak Ram. PW2 Ram Avtar s/o Raja Ram is brother-in-law of PW1 who was also li...
Satya Gupta Vs. Guneet Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:7. h November, 2012 + CS(OS) 2695/2011 % SATYA GUPTA ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Anuj Gupta, Advocate with Mr. Abhay Ram Gupta, Attorney of the plaintiff. versus GUNEET SINGH ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Shailender Negi, Advocate for Mr. N.S.Negi, Advocate. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. Mediation between the parties has failed. The counsel for the parties state that this suit for partition of immovable property is ripe for framing of issues.2. The undisputed facts are that: i) One Shri Jai Narain Gupta and one Shri Raj Kumar Aggarwal were the owners of the ground floor built on half portion admeasuring 120.575 square yards of property No.14/10, Shakti Nagar, Delhi-110007; ii) The father of the defendant was a tenant of the said ground floor, paying half of the rent to Shri Jai Narain Gupta and remaining half rent to Mr. Raj Kumar Aggarwal; iii) Shri Jai Narain Gupta died on 01.01.1998 an...
Spank Hotels Private Limited Vs. -------------
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:07.11.2012 + COMPANY PETITION NO. 325 OF 201.In the matter of The Companies Act, 1956 And Petition under Sections 391(2) & 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 Scheme of Amalgamation of SPANK HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED . Transferor Company AND LEMON TREE HOTELS LIMITED (formerly known as Lemon Tree Hotels Private Limited) .................Transferee Company Through Mr. Mukesh Sukhija, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. K.S. Pradhan, Deputy Registrar of Companies for the Regional Director. Mr.Rajiv Bahl, Advocate for the Official Liquidator. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) 1. This joint Petition has been filed under sections 391(2) & 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 by the Petitioner Transferor Company and Transferee Company seeking sanction of the Scheme of Amalgamation of SPANK HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED (Transferor Company); with Lemon Tree Hotels Limited (Transferee Company).2. The registered offices o...
- ‹ Prev
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- Next ›
- Last »