Delhi Court November 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.
Sukhdev Prasad Yadav and ors. Vs. New India Assurance Co Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:6. h November, 2013 % + MAC.APP. No.201/2012 SUKHDEV PRASAD YADAV & ORS. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Navneet Goyal, Advocate. Versus NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. This cross-appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 20.11.2010, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted the compensation as under:a). b). c). Loss of income Pain and sufferings, loss of amenities etc. Special diet & conveyance charges Total : Rs. 38,744/: Rs.50,000/: Rs.10,000/_______________ : Rs.98,744/- Interest at the rate of 7.5 % per annum was also awarded in favour of the claimants from the date of filing of the petition till realization.2. By way of the present appeal, the appellant No.1/injured is seeking enhancement of the compensation amount as noted above.3. Learned counsel for appellant submits that the...
Novatium Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
$~4 * THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:06. 11.2013 + ARB.P. 259/2013 NOVATIUM SOLUTIONS PVT LTD ..... Petitioner Versus BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. ..... Respondent ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE: For the Petitioner: Mr. J.K. Singh and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocates For the Respondent: Ms. Tanushree Sinha, Advocate CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J ARB.P. 259/2013 and IA No.13328/2013 (u/s. 151 CPC for modification of order dated 05.07.2013) 1. This is a petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act). Notice in this petition was issued on 05.07.2013. The captioned interlocutory application is filed by the petitioner for modification of order dated 05.07.2013. The reasons which propelled the petitioner to seek modification, are, set out in order dated 26.08.2013.2. The respondent entered appearance on 13.09.2013 when, time was granted to file a reply to the main petition as well as ...
Digamber Builders and Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Inder Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
* 23. + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No.1577 of 2012 & I.A. Nos. 10368 and 14302 of 2012 and 9066 of 2013 DIGAMBER BUILDERS & LAND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Ashish Mohan with Mr. Rohit Gandhi and Mr. Varun Garg, Advocates. versus INDER SINGH ..... Defendant Through: Mr. K. G. Chhokar, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR % ORDER0611.2013 1. The above suit has been filed by Digamber Builders & Land Developers Private Limited against Mr. Inder Singh seeking specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 11th February 2010 in respect of sale of half share of Khasra No.308 (admeasuring 4 bighas and 16 biswas) and Khasra No.309 (admeasuring 4 bighas and 16 biswas) in village Bhalaswa, Jehangirpur, Delhi. Alternatively, it is prayed that in the event specific performance cannot be granted, the Court should pass a decree for damages in the sum of Rs.80 lakhs along with pendente lite and future interest @ 24 % per annum. A third prayer is for a ...
Suneet Ahuja Vs. Komal Ahuja
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:06. 11.2013 + FAO NO.44 OF2013& CMs 17579-80/2013 SUNEET AHUJA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. P.Vinay Kumar with Ms.Sadiqua Fatima, Advocates. versus KOMAL AHUJA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Abhinav Bajaj, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI % MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (Open Court) 1. The present appeal is directed against the order of the Family Court in HMA No.58/2012 whereby the respondents (wifes) application for maintenance under Section 24 under the Hindu Marriage Act was allowed.2. The facts of the appellants case are that the appellant and the respondent got married on 2.1.2001. The appellant i.e. husband is working as a Naval Officer. The wife claimed that she was harassed and eventually thrown out of the matrimonial home in November, 2010. The husband preferred divorce proceedings on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1) (ia) under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. D...
Radhey Shyam Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on :24.10.2013 Judgment delivered on:06.11.2013 CRL.A. 1375/2010 RADHEY SHYAM Through: ..... Appellant Mr.R.N.Dubey, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Sunil Sharma, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 On the intervening night of 18-19.01.2006 at about 3.45 a.m. DD No.27-A was received in police station Tilak Nagar giving information through an unknown person that one lady was lying murdered in House No.WZ-12, Chaukhandi Village. This DD was entrusted to SI Jaipal Singh (PW-8) who along with constable Vinod (PW-16) reached the spot. 2 On the way on reaching the primary school Chaukhandi, a TSR was noted coming from the opposite side; on the signal given by the TSR driver PW-8 stopped his vehicle, Joginder (PW-1) was driving the said TSR. The appellant Radhey Shaym was sitting in this TSR. PW-1 informed the police officials that Radhey Shyam w...
New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Sukhdev Prasad Yadav and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:6. h November, 2013 % + MAC.APP. No.282/2011 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate. Versus SUKHDEV PRASAD YADAV & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Navneet Goyal, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 20.11.2010, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.98,744/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.2. The sole ground argued by learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company is that driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid driving licence at the time of the accident, therefore, in that eventuality, the learned Tribunal ought to have exonerated the Insurance Company from the liability of paying compensation. 3 Admittedly, recovery rights have b...
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co Ltd Vs. Lajwanti and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:6. h November, 2013 MAC.APP. 907/2011 ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv. versus LAJWANTI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Saran Suri and Mr. Gunjan Kumar, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 15.07.2011, whereby ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for a sum of Rs.26,47,500/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of realization.2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued that the deceased was 47 years of age at the time of accident, despite that ld. Tribunal has granted 50% towards future prospects.3. To strengthen the arguments, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has relied upon Rajesh and Ors. Vs. Rajbir Singh and Ors. 2013 (6) SCALE563 Ld. Counsel appearing on be...
Santosh Kumar Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
$~21 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5021/2013 Date of decision:6. h November, 2013 % SANTOSH KUMAR Through : Ms.Rekha Ms.Punam Advocates. ..... Petitioner Palli and Singh, versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through : ..... Respondents Mr.Sachin Datta, CGSC with Mr.Vikram Aditya and Mr.Naryayan, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA GITA MITTAL, J.(Oral) 1. By way of the instant writ petition the petitioner is seeking parity with the punishment which was imposed upon him with the punishment which was imposed on Ct. Ct.Sapan Singh, Ct.Shahbad Khan, Ct.Ram Swaroop and Ct.Lakhvir Kumar who were charged with identical charges in proceedings which were conducted against them as well other CISF personnel totalling fourteen.2. Before us the factual matrix is not disputed so far as this ground of challenge is concerned. It is also pointed out by the parties that apart from the petitioner, two other personnel namely one H.Ct.Gurnam Singh ...
M.P. Tiwari Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.6521/1998 6th November, 2013 % M.P. TIWARI .... Petitioner Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Saahila Lamba, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. S.K. Taneja, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Mr. Harpreet Singh, Advocates for respondent Nos. 3 to 6. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Irrespective of the cause of action pleaded in the writ petition and the prayer made in the same, before me today on behalf of the petitioner what is argued and relief claimed, is the entitlement of the petitioner to stand promoted as an Assistant Engineer with the respondent No.3/employer in terms of the selection process of February 1984. Since the petitioner has retired on 30.6.2003, a higher monetary emolument package taking the petitioner as having been promoted w.e.f 1.7.1983 as an Assistant Engineer is claimed. During the...
Shri S. R. Aggarwal Vs. National Textile Coporation and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.2216/1999 6th November, 2013 % SHRI S. R. AGGARWAL Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Anil Mittal, Advocate. Versus NATIONAL TEXTILE COPORATION AND ANR. Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Advocate for respondent No.1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition impugns the orders passed by the departmental authorities; of the disciplinary authority dated 25.6.1998 and the appellate authority dated 30.9.1998; inflicting the penalty of dismissal from services upon the petitioner. Charge against the petitioner is misuse of LTC rules and also availing LTC amounts without utilizing the amounts for the requisite travel.2. The scope of hearing of a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the orders of the departmental authorities is now well settled. This Court can only interfere if the findings are perverse or violate the principl...
- ‹ Prev
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- Next ›
- Last »