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.
M/S. Bigdot Advertising and Communications Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of Indi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No.226/2000 27th November, 2012 % M/S. BIGDOT ADVERTISING & COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD. ...... Plaintiff Through: Mr. K.R. Chawla, Advocate with Mr. Sunil Verma, Advocate. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Through: ...... Defendants Mr. B.V. Niren, CGSC for the defendant No.1. Mr. P.K. Bansal, Advocate for defendant No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a suit filed by the plaintiff company M/s BIGDOT Advertising & Communications Pvt. Ltd. for recovery of `3,16,39,009.64/against Union of India through Secretary, Department of Telecommunications/defendant no.1 and Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd. (TCIL)/defendant no.2. The amount claimed is stated to be the balance payment due for advertisements which were got published by the plaintiff for the defendant no.2. 2(i) The facts of the case are that the plaintiff received a letter dated 4.10.1995 (E...
Tina JaIn Vs. Sunil Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:22. d November, 2012 Pronounced on:27. h November, 2012 + MAC.APP. 642/2011 TINA JAIN Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. with Ms. Suman N. Rawat, Adv. versus SUNIL KUMAR & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Adv. with Mr. Sanjeet Raman, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of `1,32,000/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of the Appellant for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 16.02.2010.2. In the absence of any Appeal by the driver, owner or the Insurer, the finding on negligence reached by the Claims Tribunal has attained finality.3. After the accident, the Appellant was removed to Rajendra Hospital, Sikandrabad, U.P. After first aid, she was shifted to St. Stephens Hospital where she remained admitted from 16.02.2010 to 24.02.2010....
State Vs. Sanjay and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
$~3. *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1430/2011 Date of decision:27. h November, 2012 STATE ..... Appellant Through Mr. Dayan Krishnan, ASC. versus SANJAY & ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sanjay Jha, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): State has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 20th December, 2010 passed by District Judge-VIII, Additional Sessions Judge and Incharge of Rohini Courts, in SC No. 82/2010 titled State versus Sanjay and Another arising out of FIR No. 691/2006, Police Station Tilak Nagar, Delhi. By the impugned judgment, the accused Sanjay (hereinafter referred to as A-1) has been convicted under Section 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC, for short). However, accused No. A-1 and other accused, namely, Jagdish Prasad, Sonu and Bishan Devi (hereinafter referred to as A-2 to A-4) have been acquitted of the charges under Section 304-B/302/34 IPC. A-2 to...
Bimal Kumar Jhunjhunwala Vs. Ifci Factors Ltd and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
3&2 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3937/2012 and Crl. M.A. No. 18900/2012 (for stay) KRISHNA MURARI LAL Through ..... Petitioner Mr. U. Hazarika, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Raka B. Phookan, Ms. Neha Tandon and Mr. Paul Paske, Advs. versus IFCI FACTORS LTD Through ..... Respondent Ms. Anjali Sharma, Advocate AND + CRL.M.C. 3935/2012 and Crl. M.A. No. 18896/2012 (for stay) BIMAL KUMAR JHUNJHUNWALA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. U. Hazarika, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Raka B. Phookan, Ms. Neha Tandon and Mr. Paul Paske, Advs. versus IFCI FACTORS LTD & ORS ..... Respondents Through Ms. Anjali Sharma, Advocate for Respondent no. 1 Date of Decision:27. h November, 2012 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (ORAL):1. Present petitions have been filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Cr. P.C.) seeking quashing of Criminal Complaint No. 650/NA/2012 under Section 138 read with Section 141 of Negotiable Instruments...
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Amarwati and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. h August, 2012 Pronounced on:27. h November, 2012 + MAC.APP. 199/2008 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Joy Basu, Advocate versus SMT. AMARWATI & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Manjeet Chawla, Advocate for Claimant. Mr. P.K. Seth, Advocate for Respondent/Tagore International School. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The present Appeal is dismissed in terms of the judgment passed today in MAC.APP. 167/2008, titled ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. v. BABY KOMAL & ANR.2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned judgment. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE NOVEMBER 27 2012 vk...
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Master Ankit and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. h August, 2012 Pronounced on:27. h November, 2012 + MAC.APP. 211/2008 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Joy Basu, Advocate versus MASTER ANKIT & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Manjeet Chawla, Advocate for Claimant. Mr. P.K. Seth, Advocate for Respondent/Tagore International School. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The present Appeal is dismissed in terms of the judgment passed today in MAC.APP. 167/2008, titled ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. v. BABY KOMAL & ANR.2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned judgment. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE NOVEMBER 27 2012 vk...
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Amarwati and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. h August, 2012 Pronounced on:27. h November, 2012 + MAC.APP. 212/2008 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Joy Basu, Advocate versus SMT. AMARWATI & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Manjeet Chawla, Advocate for Claimant. Mr. P.K. Seth, Advocate for Respondent/Tagore International School. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The present Appeal is dismissed in terms of the judgment passed today in MAC.APP. 167/2008, titled ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. v. BABY KOMAL & ANR.2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned judgment. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE NOVEMBER 27 2012 vk...
Babu Lal and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
$ R-92 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:27. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 621/2005 BABU LAL & ANR. Through: .... Appellants Mr.S.N. Parashar, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: .... Respondents Mr. Sandeep Khatri with Ms. Reeta Kaul, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of `1,00,000/awarded in favour of the Appellants for the death of Vishal, a two year old child who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 29.06.2003.2. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellants that the compensation awarded is too meagre for the loss of the life of a young child.3. This case is covered by a judgment of this Court in the case of Satender Mahto & Ors. v. Mohd. Sahbir & Ors. MAC APP. 309/2010, decided on 23rd July, 2012, wherein this Court granted a compensation of `2,25,000/- towards loss of dependency and a sum of `75,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages...
Naresh Vs. State (Govt. of Nct Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
$~R-38 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.733/2011 Date of decision:27. h November, 2012 NARESH Through ..... Appellant Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) Naresh, the appellant herein, stands convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short) for murder of his wifeReena and has been sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he has to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.2. The undisputed factual position is that the appellant got married to the deceased Reena on 21st March, 2006. Reena died on 11th May, 2006 in her matrimonial home at C-68, Raja Vihar Badli, Delhi. The appellant does not dispute that he was present at the aforesaid property in the night intervening 10th and 11th May, 2006.3. Homicidal death of Reena stan...
New India Assurance Company Ltd Vs. Rashi Lal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:1. t November, 2012 Pronounced on:27. h November, 2012 + MAC.APP. 399/2005 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD...... Appellant Through: Mr. Joy Basu, Adv. versus RASHI LAL & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Nitinjya Chaudhary, Adv. R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. The Appeal is directed against a judgment dated 29.01.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby while awarding a compensation of `9,95,000/- in favour of the First Respondent, the Appellants (New India Assurance Company Limited) plea of breach of the terms and conditions of the policy was rejected on the ground that the Appellant failed to prove that there was willful breach on the part of the Insured.2. The finding on negligence is not challenged by the Appellant Insurance Company. The other Respondents, that is the driver and financer (defecto owner) of the vehicle have also not challenged the qua...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »