Delhi Court August 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.
Parmeshwar Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
$~05. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6396/2010 % Judgment dated 30.08.2013 PARMESHWAR Through : ..... Petitioner Ms.Gayatri Verma and Ms.Neha Kapoor Khanna, Advs. versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through : Ms.Zubeda Begum and Ms.Sana Ansari, Advs. for respondent no.1. Ms.Saroj Bidawat, Adv. for respondent no.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Rule. With the consent of counsel for the parties, present writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal.2. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents to compensate him for the loss of life of his son, who was 12 years of age, at the time of his death and for the harassment suffered by him. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondents to be diligent in execution of their duties and responsibility and remove all stray/wild animals from the resident...
Sh. Khilar Singh Vs. Chand Kiran Tyagi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % CS(OS) 157/2012 Date of Decision:29. h August, 2013 + # SH. KHILAR SINGH ....Plaintiff Through: Mr. S.K. Sharma, Mr. Avinash Sharma and Mr. Rohit Gandhi, Advocates VERSUS $ * CHAND KIRAN TYAGI & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Som Dutta Sharma, Advocate for Defendant no. 2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.BHASIN ORDER P.K.BHASIN, J: The plaintiff has filed this suit for recovery of possession, mesne profits etc. in respect of plot no. D-54, admeasuring 96 sq. yds. forming part of khasra no.283/2 in village Chhattarpur(hereinafter referred to as the suit property) on the allegations that he is the owner of the same but the defendants have illegally dispossessed him and taken its possession on 25th July,2005. It is stated in the plaint that the suit property originally belonged to M/s D.B. Rewari, R.N. Rewari and P.P. Rewari whom sold the same and delivered its possession to P.D. Aggarwal and Hakumat Rai, partners of M/s Prabhu Land and Finance...
S. Jaskirat Singh @ Prince Khurana and anr. Vs. S. Dalip Singh (Deceas ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. h August, 2013 % + RFA No.392/2010 S. JASKIRAT SINGH @ PRINCE KHURANA & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Umesh Kumar, Adv. Versus S. DALIP SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRs. & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vinod Wadhwa & Ms. Vipasha Singh, Advs. for R-4. Mr. R.S. Sahni, Adv. for R5,6,9&10. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.The appeal impugns the judgment and decree dated 04.02.2010 (in Civil Suit No.428/2008) of the Court of Additional District Judge-03 (North), Delhi dismissing the suit filed by the two appellants / plaintiffs, (a) for partition of property No.2429, Tilak Street, Chuna Mandi, Paharganj, New Delhi; (b) for permanent injunction restraining the respondents / defendants from dispossessing the appellants / plaintiffs from the portion of the property in their occupation and / or dealing with the said property; and, (c) for rendition of accounts of the business carried on from...
See (Dsidc) Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No. 4974/2011 29th August , 2013 SEE (DSIDC) ......Petitioner Through: Mr. S.C.Kalra, Adv. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. M.P.Singh, Adv. for R-1. Ms. Anjana Gosain, Adv. for R-2 to 4. Mr. Anand Prakash, Adv. for R-5. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Petitioner is an association of retired and serving employees of Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (DSIDC). By this writ petition, relief is sought for introduction of a pension scheme for employees of DSIDC.2. Originally, recommendation was made by DSIDC and approval of the Government was sought, however, the Government vide its letter dated 16.3.2000 said that benefit of pension scheme cannot be given to autonomous bodies by the government making contribution. The said letter reads as under:16th March, 2000 New Delhi Dear Shri Ray The Department of...
Ravi Oberoi Vs. Ram Niwas and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
$~R-20E * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:29. h August, 2013 MAC A. NO. 838/2005 % + RAVI OBEROI Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Nikita Aggarwal, Advocate. Versus RAM NIWAS & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate for Respondent No.3/Insurance Company. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is preferred for enhancement of the compensation award against the impugned award dated 25.01.2005, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation as under:1. Towards pain & sufferings and loss of amenities of life 2. Towards loss of income due to thirty - Rs.1,94,400/Percent permanent disability suffered 3. Towards expenditure incurred on Medicines/treatment - Rs.53,382/- 4. Towards expenditure incurred on conveyance and special diet - Rs.20,000/- TOTAL MACA-838-2005 - Rs. 40,000/- ______________ - Rs.3,07,782/______________ Page 1 o2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued ...
Surinder Kaur Vs. G.S. Bawa and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No. 1226 of 2009 Reserved on: July 11, 2013 Decision on: August 29, 2013 SURINDER KAUR ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. C.P. Vig, Advocate. versus G.S. BAWA & ANR. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sandeep P. Aggarwal with Mr. Rajesh Pathak, Advocates in IA No. 10783 of 2009. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER 29 08.2013 IA No. 10783 of 2009 (by Defendants u/O VII Rule 11 CPC), and IA No. 15152 of 2012 (by the Plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 CPC) 1. The background to these applications is that the aforementioned suit CS (OS) No. 1226 of 2009 was filed by Smt. Surinder Kaur as Plaintiff against Mr. G.S. Bawa and Mr. Rajvinder Singh, son of Mr. G.S. Bawa, Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 respectively, seeking relief of possession, declaration, permanent and mandatory injunction in respect of the ground floor of the property at A-1, Vishal Enclave, New Delhi (the suit property).2. It is stated in the plaint that, in terms of a compromise decree dated 21st No...
Harish @ Kale Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :16. h JULY, 2013 DECIDED ON :29. h AUGUST, 2013 + CRL.A. 441/2012 & CRL.M.B. 759/2012 HARISH @ KALE Through : ..... Appellant Mr.K.Singhal, Advocate. versus THE STATE Through : ..... Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.The present appeal stands allowed in terms of a detailed common judgment delivered today which is placed in the file of Crl.A.No.1247/2011 titled Surinder Kumar @ Nanhe vs. State NCT of Delhi. (S.P.GARG) JUDGE AUGUST 29 2013/tr...
S.P.Nagrath Vs. Director of Education, Govt. of Nct, Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No. 4839/2011 29th August , 2013 S.P.NAGRATH ......Petitioner Through: Mr. A.P. Nagrath, Adv. VERSUS DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, GOVT. OF NCT, DELHI & ANR. ...... Respondents Through: Ms. Sonia Arora, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Seraj Ahmad and Mr. N.A.Khan, Advocates. for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. In spite of repeated opportunities, respondent no.2-school has not filed counter-affidavit. On the last date of hearing i.e 5.4.2013, last opportunity was granted subject to payment of costs of Rs. 5000/-. Neither the costs have been paid nor the counter-affidavit has been filed by respondent no.2. WPC 4839/2011 counter-affidavit. I have therefore heard the counsel for the petitioner and am proceeding to dispose of the case.2. Petitioner seeks the relief of benefit of ACP Scheme. Benefit is sought w.e.f 9.8.1999 and accordingly higher revised scale of pay. Petitione...
Surinder Kumar @ Nanhe Vs. State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :16. h JULY, 2013 DECIDED ON :29. h AUGUST, 2013 + CRL.A. 1247/2011 & CRL.M.B. 952/2013 SURINDER KUMAR @ NANHE Through : ..... Appellant Mr.K.Singhal, Advocate. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through : AND + ..... Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CRL.A. 441/2012 & CRL.M.B. 759/2012 HARISH @ KALE Through : ..... Appellant Mr.K.Singhal, Advocate. versus THE STATE Through : ..... Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Surinder Kumar @ Nanhe and Harish @ Kale (the appellants) impugn a judgment dated 13.07.2011 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 881/2007 arising out of FIR No. 637/2007 PS Nangloi by which they were held guilty for committing offence punishable under Section 392 read with Section 397/34 IPC. By an order dated 20.07.2011, they were sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine ` 2,000/- each.2. Allegations against the appellants were that on the night interveni...
Udai Bairagi @ Guddu Vs. State N.C.T. of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :29. h August, 2013 + CRL.A. 285/2001 & Crl.M.B.No.1794/2010 UDAI BAIRAGI @ GUDDU ..... Appellant Through : Mr.S.K.Rai, Advocate. versus STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Udai Bairagi @ Guddu (the appellant) challenges a judgment dated 04.04.2001 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.55/1999 arising out of FIR No.156/1999 registered at Police Station Ambedkar Nagar by which he and Meena were convicted under Section 366/34 IPC. By an order dated 09.04.2001 they were sentenced to undergo RI for three years with fine `500/-.2. Allegations against the appellant were that he and Meena kidnapped prosecutrix X (assumed name) aged 16 years on 08.03.1999 with the intention to compel her to marry Guddu. During the course of proceedings the prosecutrix was recovered, Meena and Udai Bairagi @ Guddu were arrested and statement of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »