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.
Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Rajinder Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:27th August, 2013 % + CM(M) 1054/2012 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur and Mr.Amit Gaur, Advocates. Versus RAJINDER SHARMA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM(M) 1054/2012 1. Perusal of the order sheets reveals that respondent No.3 has been served by citation, however, none appears on his behalf.2. On behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, one Mr. J.S. Kanwar, Advocate appeared on 01.07.2013. Thereafter, for the last two consecutive dates, none is appearing on behalf of the aforesaid respondents. So is the position today.3. In view of the above, this Court is left with no option but to proceed with the instant petition.4. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 24.08.2012, whereby an application under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC filed by the petitioner seeking...
Suresh Chand Sharma and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: August 07, 2013 Judgment Delivered on: August 27, 2013 W.P.(C) 4394/2008 SUDHIR KUMAR ATREY Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.M.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Vinay Kr.Garg, Advocate with Ms.Namrta Singh, Mr.Amit Srivastava, Advocates for R-3 & 4 W.P.(C) 5915/2008 SURESH KUMAR YADAV Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Amarjeet Singh, Advocate versus U.O.I & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Vinay Kr.Garg, Advocate with Ms.Namrta Singh, Mr.Amit Srivastava, Advocates for R-3 & 4 W.P.(C) 6237/2012 SURESH CHAND SHARMA AND ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.A.K.Behera, Advocate. versus UNI0N OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Ravinder Agarwal, Advocate for R-1 to 4 WP(C) 894/2013 GOVIND GOPAL & ANR. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.Vinay Kr.Garg, Advocate with Ms.Namrta Singh, Mr.Amit Srivastava, Advocates versus U.O.I & ORS Represented by: ....
Ravi Sharma Vs. Shubh Marketing Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No. 2890 of 2011 Reserved on: July 30, 2013 Decision on: August 27, 2013 RAVI SHARMA ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sanjeev Puri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjay Sarin and Mr. Tarun Rana, Advocates along with Plaintiff in person versus SHUBH MARKETING PVT LTD & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Feroze Ahmad, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT 27 08.2013 IA No. 468 of 2013 [u/O XXXVII Rule 3 (5) CPC] 1. This is an application by the Defendants under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) CPC seeking leave to defend the aforementioned suit filed by Mr. Ravi Sharma for recovery of a sum of Rs. 7,72,09,219 together with pendente lite and future interest at 36% per annum as agreed between the parties.2. The case of the Plaintiff is that one Mr. Alok Gupta approached the Plaintiff in January 2009 along with one Mr. Jogesh Jerath (Defendant No. 2), Mrs. Anu Jerath (Defendant No.3) and Mr. Ishwar Rohal (Defendant No.4) requesting him to invest, along ...
Uoi and ors. Vs. Mangal Singh Rawat and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Reserved on: August 07, 2013 Judgment Delivered on: August 27, 2013 W.P.(C) 8510/2011 UOI & ORS. Represented by: .....Petitioners Mr.Rajesh Katyal, Advocate versus SANSAR CHAND Represented by: .....Respondent Mr.Raunak Jain, Advocate W.P.(C) 5826/2012 UOI & ORS. Represented by: .....Petitioners Mr.Rajesh Katyal, Advocate versus MANGAL SINGH RAWAT & ANR. .....Respondents Represented by: Mr.Raunak Jain, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to filing of the above captioned petitions are that respondents in both the petitions namely; Sansar Chand, Mangal Singh Rawat and Jeevan Lal; were appointed in Special Security Bureau (hereinafter referred to as the SSB) on the posts of Constable in the General Duty cadre.2. There was a Homeopathy cadre in SSB. As per SSB (Homeopathy) Service Rules, 1992, the hierarchical stru...
Uoi and ors. Vs. Sansar Chand
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Reserved on: August 07, 2013 Judgment Delivered on: August 27, 2013 W.P.(C) 8510/2011 UOI & ORS. Represented by: .....Petitioners Mr.Rajesh Katyal, Advocate versus SANSAR CHAND Represented by: .....Respondent Mr.Raunak Jain, Advocate W.P.(C) 5826/2012 UOI & ORS. Represented by: .....Petitioners Mr.Rajesh Katyal, Advocate versus MANGAL SINGH RAWAT & ANR. .....Respondents Represented by: Mr.Raunak Jain, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to filing of the above captioned petitions are that respondents in both the petitions namely; Sansar Chand, Mangal Singh Rawat and Jeevan Lal; were appointed in Special Security Bureau (hereinafter referred to as the SSB) on the posts of Constable in the General Duty cadre.2. There was a Homeopathy cadre in SSB. As per SSB (Homeopathy) Service Rules, 1992, the hierarchical stru...
Govind Gopal and anr. Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: August 07, 2013 Judgment Delivered on: August 27, 2013 W.P.(C) 4394/2008 SUDHIR KUMAR ATREY Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.M.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Vinay Kr.Garg, Advocate with Ms.Namrta Singh, Mr.Amit Srivastava, Advocates for R-3 & 4 W.P.(C) 5915/2008 SURESH KUMAR YADAV Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Amarjeet Singh, Advocate versus U.O.I & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Vinay Kr.Garg, Advocate with Ms.Namrta Singh, Mr.Amit Srivastava, Advocates for R-3 & 4 W.P.(C) 6237/2012 SURESH CHAND SHARMA AND ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.A.K.Behera, Advocate. versus UNI0N OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Ravinder Agarwal, Advocate for R-1 to 4 WP(C) 894/2013 GOVIND GOPAL & ANR. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.Vinay Kr.Garg, Advocate with Ms.Namrta Singh, Mr.Amit Srivastava, Advocates versus U.O.I & ORS Represented by: ....
Sudhir Kumar Atrey Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: August 07, 2013 Judgment Delivered on: August 27, 2013 W.P.(C) 4394/2008 SUDHIR KUMAR ATREY Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.M.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Vinay Kr.Garg, Advocate with Ms.Namrta Singh, Mr.Amit Srivastava, Advocates for R-3 & 4 W.P.(C) 5915/2008 SURESH KUMAR YADAV Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Amarjeet Singh, Advocate versus U.O.I & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Vinay Kr.Garg, Advocate with Ms.Namrta Singh, Mr.Amit Srivastava, Advocates for R-3 & 4 W.P.(C) 6237/2012 SURESH CHAND SHARMA AND ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.A.K.Behera, Advocate. versus UNI0N OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Ravinder Agarwal, Advocate for R-1 to 4 WP(C) 894/2013 GOVIND GOPAL & ANR. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.Vinay Kr.Garg, Advocate with Ms.Namrta Singh, Mr.Amit Srivastava, Advocates versus U.O.I & ORS Represented by: ....
Mohinder Pal Singh Vs. Sunil Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:27. h August, 2013 % + RFA 178/2013 MOHINDER PAL SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. versus SUNIL KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J CM No.9357/2013 (for restoration of the appeal dismissed in default on 22nd April, 2013.1. The appeal was dismissed in default of appearance of the appellant, before it could be considered for admission. Nevertheless when the appellant filed this application for restoration notice thereof was issued to the respondent and Mr. Yogesh Sharma proxy counsel for Mr. Akil Rataeeya counsel for the respondent appeared before the Registrar (Appellate) on 19 th July, 2013. However none appears for the respondent today.2. Considering the fact that the appeal was dismissed in default at the stage when it came up for admission, for the reasons stated in the application, the appeal is restored to its original position.3. The ap...
M/S Vijai Infrastructure Limited Vs. M/S Progressive Constructions Lim ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
43# $ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % CS(OS) 70/2010 Decided on:27. h August, 2013 M/S VIJAI INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Abhinav Vashist, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nishant Menon and Mr. Prince Pawaiya, Advocates. versus M/S PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED Through: None. ..... Defendant CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J (ORAL) 1. The Plaintiff has filed the present suit under Order XXXVII CPC for recovery of Rs. 19,78,71,711.80 along with the interest @ 18% per annum from the date of the institution of the suit till realization.2. Summons to the Defendant were issued under Order XXXVII on 18 th January, 2010. The Defendant entered appearance before this Court on 23rd March, 2010 when the counsel for the applicant filed an application seeking summons for judgment under Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC. The summons for judgment were received by the Defendant on 8 th July, 2010 and he filed his application under Order XXXVII Rule 3 (5) CPC bei...
Anil Dutta Mishra Vs. Gandhi Smarak Sangrahalaya Samiti and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: August 27, 2013 + LPA No. 626/2013 ..... Appellant Mr.B.P.Patil, Senior Advocate with Mr.Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, Mr.Ravi Chandra Prakash, Mr.Mukesh Kumar Singh, Ms.Filza Moonis, Advocates ANIL DUTTA MISHRA Represented by: versus GANDHI SMARAK SANGRAHALAYA SAMITI & ORS ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Ravinder Aggarwal, Advocate with Mr.M.P.Singh, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.(Oral) 1. This appeal has been filed challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated July 17, 2013 in WP(C) No.13051/2009 and CM Nos. 14016/2009 and 17010/2012 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant as not being maintainable.2. The challenge in the writ petition was inter alia to the orders passed by the respondent Nos.1,2& 4 compulsorily retiring the appellants from service. LPA 626/2013 Smarak Sangrahalaya Samiti....
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »