Delhi Court October 2013 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.
Satpal Buggal Vs. Gursharan Buggal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:28. h October, 2013 % + RFA4472013 & CM No.14622/2013 (for stay). SATPAL BUGGAL Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Anita Kapoor, Adv. versus GURSHARAN BUGGAL Through: ..... Respondent Mr. S.C. Singhal, Adv. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 The appeal impugns the judgment and decree (dated 25th April, 2013 of the Court of the Addl. District Judge-06, West District, Tis Hazari Courts in Civil Suit No.729/2012 filed by the respondent/plaintiff) for recovery of possession of immovable property and for recovery of mesne profits/damages for use and occupation from the appellant.2. The said suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff pleading:(a). that her husband Shri Subhash Buggal was the owner of the following two properties:(i). Property No.29-A, ad measuring 75 sq. yds. and comprising of three rooms situated in the colony of Om Vihar, Uttam Nagar in Khasra No.789 and 790 of the Revenue Estate of Villag...
Ghanshyam and ors Vs. U.O.i and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:28. 10.2013 W.P.(C) 6990/2007 GHANSHYAM & ORS Through: versus ..... Petitioners Mr. Nishant Sharia, Adv. U.O.I & ORS Through: + ..... Respondents Mr. Shankar Kumar Jha, Adv. W.P.(C) 3322/2008 & CM63762008 O.P.GUPTA & ANR Through: versus ..... Petitioners Mr. Nishant Sharia, Adv. UOI & ORS Through: + ..... Respondents Mr. Shankar Kumar Jha, Adv. W.P.(C) 10539/2009 & CM No.9323/2009 SHIV KUMAR & ANR. Through: versus ..... Petitioners Mr. Nishant Sharia, Adv. UOI & OTHERS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Shankar Kumar Jha, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.In these writ petitions, the petitioners are the licencees of the respondent- Indian Railways for providing catering/ vending services at railway stations and their contracts are being renewed from time to time. They had been paying the licence fees to the Indian Railways @ 12% of the annual sale turnover. Vide Circular No.51 of 2005 dated 09.12.200...
Babu @ Manoj Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :28. h October, 2013 + CRL.A. 294/2002 BABU @ MANOJ ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Harish Khanna, Advocate. VERSUS THE STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Ajay Singh, Babu @ Manoj (the appellant), Samjay Samual and Sanjeev Kumar Singh were arrested in case FIR No.96/1999 and 97/1990 registered at Police Station Delhi Cantt and sent for trial for committing offences under Sections 394/397/308/34 IPC and 5 TADA (P) Act. Allegations against them were that on 06.04.1990 at 10.40 A.M. at Syndicate Bank, Air Force Station Palam, they hatched conspiracy to rob the bank. Pursuant to the said conspiracy, Ajay Singh, who was armed with a pistol fired at Meghna Nand, guard on duty at the gate. The bullet pierced through his wrist and came out of in between thumb and index finger. Ajay Singh again pointed the fire arm towards head of the guard and warned him not to raise hue and cry. Accused persons thre...
Union Public Service Commission Vs. Dr.Akshay Bahadur and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: October 28, 2013 + W.P.(C) 6260/2013 UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Naresh Kaushik, Advocate with Ms.Amita Kalkal Chaudhary, Ms.Adity Gupta, Advocates versus DR. AKSHAY BAHADUR & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Atul Bandhu, Advocate for R-1 Mr.Sanjay Ghose, Advocate with Mr.Mohd.Farukh, Advocate for R-2 Mr.Ashok Kumar Mohapatra, Advocate for R-3 Ms.Aishwarya Bhati, Advocate with Mr.Amit Verma, Advocate for R-4, 5, 6 Ms.Zubeda Begum, Advocate with Mr.Sikhar Garg, Advocate for R-7 & 8 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Respondents No.1 to 6 were the applicants before the Central Administrative Tribunal and have obtained an order dated May 28, 2013 favourable to them in Original Application No.3653/2012 and Union Public Service Commission is aggrieved by the order because a standard for evaluation by ...
Fortuna Foundation and Engineers Amd Consultants P Vs. Rbi and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on :22. 10.2013 Judgment pronounced on :28. 10.2013 W.P.(C) 1161/2010 FORTUNA FOUNDATION AND ENGINEERS AMD CONSULTANTS PVT LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Vivek Madhok, Adv. versus RBI AND ANR ..... Respondent Through: Mr Ramesh Babu, Ms Swati Setia and Mr Srinjoy Banerjee, Advs. for respondent No.1. Mr Tanmaya Mehta and Mr Arnav Kumar, Adv for respondent No.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN V.K. JAIN, J.The petitioner before this Court took a loan of Rs 175 lakhs from respondent No.2-India Bulls Financial Services Limited on 10.05.2008. With effect from 01.07.2008, respondent No.2 increased its Prime Lending Rate (PLR) by 1.5% though the other banks/financial companies have stated to have increased their PLR by 0.5%. As a result, the rate at which interest was payable by the petitioner to respondent No.2 increased to 18.5% per annum. The petitioner, therefore, opted for foreclosure of the said loan. While allowing f...
Mr. Ashok K. Nanda Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.5579/1998 % Reserved on :7. h October, 2013 Pronounced on:28. h October, 2013 MR. ASHOK K. NANDA Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Piyush Sharma and Mr. Vikram Saini Advocates. VERSUS PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Rajat Arora, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J1 This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugns the orders passed by the departmental authorities; of the disciplinary authority dated 22.9.1997 and the appellate authority dated 18.5.1998; whereby petitioner was visited with the punishment of removal from services. Most of the charges against the petitioner contained in the chargesheet dated 2.6.1992 (and which is accompanied by imputations of misconduct) have been held against the petitioner. With respect to accounts of three customers namely M/s Savik Vijay Engineering Private Limited, M/s Tajes...
Amar Singh Vs. Mohammad Sayeed
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: October 28, 2013 + RC. Rev. No.485/2011 AMAR SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Ashesh Lal, Adv. with Mr.Raghav Parwatiyar, Adv. versus MOHAMMAD SAYEED Through ..... Respondent Mr.Abhinay Gupta, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioner Amar Singh has filed the present revision petition under Section 25-B (8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the DRC Act) against the judgment dated 5 th October, 2011 passed by the Addl. Rent Controller, North-West, Rohini, Delhi in eviction petition bearing No.E-84/2009 filed by the petitioner under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act.2. By the impugned judgment, the eviction petition was dismissed. The prayer is made in the present revision petition for setting-aside and reversing the impugned judgment.3. The case of the petitioner before the learned Trial Court was that the petitioner is the owner of the property beari...
Ashok Kumar and anr Vs. Paramjeet Kaur and Anrq
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:28. h October, 2013 % + RFA7852010 & CM No.21229/2012 (for vacation of stay) ASHOK KUMAR & ANR Through: ..... Appellants Mr. B.P. Dhalla, Adv. Versus PARAMJEET KAUR & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Manish Kohli with Mr. Pradeep Shukla & Mr. Manjeet Pathak, Advs. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 The appeal impugns the judgment and decree (dated 13.09.2010 of the Court of Additional District Judge, (Central-12), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Civil Suit No.470/09 (Unique case ID No.02401C0984832005) filed by the respondents / plaintiffs) directing the appellants / defendants to hand over vacant and peaceful physical possession of suit shop bearing Municipal No.43/1073, Kalkaji, DDA Flats, New Delhi and to pay mesne profits / damages for use and occupation.2. Notice of the appeal was issued on the contention of the counsel for the appellants / defendants that the appellants / defendants were the ...
Kali Charan Vs. Commissioner of Delhi Police
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:28. 10.2013 + W.P.(C) 6758/2013 KALI CHARAN Through: versus + ..... Petitioner Mr. Tarun Sharma, Adv. COMMISSIONER OF DELHI POLICE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel with Ms. Sana Ansari, Advs. W.P.(C) 6781/2013 MAHINDER GUPTA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Tarun Sharma, Adv. versus COMMISSIONER OF DELHI POLICE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel with Ms. Sana Ansari, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) The respondent-Commissioner of Police, Delhi invited applications for grant of temporary licences for selling fire crackers in Delhi during the period from 11.10.2013 to 05.11.2013. The petitioners before this Court applied for grant of such a licence in terms of Rule 113 of the Explosives Rules. The application of the petitioners for grant of such licence were, however, rejected vide two separate orders both dated 24.10.2013 on the ground that...
Leela Singh Vs. Bahadur and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h October, 2013 % + MAC.APP. 812/2013 LEELA SINGH ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Shoumik Mazumdar for Mr.Pratap Singh, Advocate. Versus BAHADUR & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP. 812/2013 1. The instant appeal was listed for the first time on 02.09.2013 before this Court, when at the request of counsel for the appellant; this matter was adjourned to 09.09.2013.2. On the said date also, at the request of learned counsel for the appellant, the matter was adjourned for today, i.e., 28.10.2013.3. However, notice has not yet been issued in this appeal.4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant is again seeking an adjournment which has been declined by this court.5. Vide the impugned award dated 21.08.2012, the learned Tribunal has granted compensation for a sum of Rs.59,412/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from ...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »