Delhi Court January 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 24 of about 723 results (0.021 seconds)National Insurance Company Vs. Swaraj Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.App. 375/2013 Judgment delivered on:23. d January, 2014 % NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr. L.K. Tyagi, Adv. versus SWARAJ SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Rohan Thawani, Ms. Vandana Sehgal and Ms. Kriti Singh Gahlout, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the award dated 22.11.2012, whereby ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation as under:Expenses on Prosthesis Loss of future income Loss of income Medical Expenses Non-pecuniary as above Conveyance and special diet Total : : : : : : : Rs.16,99,200.00 Rs.18,36,000.00 Rs. 40,000.00 Rs. 1,70,300.00 Rs. 2,00,000.00 Rs. 20,000.00 Rs.39,65,500.00 Ld. Tribunal has also granted interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of the petition till its realization.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 09.06.2010, respondent no.1/injured was driving a car bearing No.DL-2CW-6859 from Rajinder ...
Tag this Judgment!Sub.inspector Gurbachan Singh Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: January 02, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: January 23, 2014 + W.P.(C) 3838/1999 SUB.INSPECTOR GURBACHAN SINGH .....Petitioner Represented by: Mr.J.S.Manhas, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Ruchir Mishra, Advocate with Mr.Bhupinder Sharma, Dy.Commandant, BSF CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT NATH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Shorn of unnecessary details, the factual backdrop leading to the filing of the present petition, is that in the year 1967 the petitioner was enrolled as a Constable in Border Security Force and earned promotions to the rank of Sub-Inspector in course of time. In the year 1981 the petitioner was attached to the BSF Subsidiary Training Centre, Ranidanga, Silliguri (hereinafter referred to as the STC Ranidanga).2. On June 29, 1987 a charge sheet was served upon the petitioner in which four charges were laid against him as under:FIRST CHARGE BS...
Tag this Judgment!The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rajinder and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R6A and R6B * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:23. d January, 2014 + MAC.A.210/2006 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. Versus RAJINDER AND ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: NEMO. AND + MAC.A.290/2006 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. Versus LAL SINGH AND ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: NEMO. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The above noted appeals have arisen from a common judgment dated 22.08.2005 whereby, ld. Tribunal in Suit No.22/05 has awarded compensation a consolidated amount of Rs.10,000/- on account of pain and suffering, medical treatment, loss of income etc. In Suit No.23/05, awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.5,75,000/- on account of death of deceased Ramkali.2. Ld. Tribunal has also granted interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the payment made.3. Since both ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Vakil Vs. State Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :16. h January, 2014 DECIDED ON :23. d January, 2014 + CRL.A.1042/2012 MOHD. VAKIL Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Rajeev Kapoor, Advocate. VERSUS STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .... Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Mohd.Vakil (the appellant) questions the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 31.03.2012 in Sessions Case No.137/11 arising out of FIR No.267/08 registered at Police Station Dabri by which he was convicted for committing offences under Sections 395/412 IPC. By an order on sentence dated 09.04.2012, he was awarded rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine `25,000/- each under Section 395 and 412 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on 12.05.2008 at about 11.45 A.M. at house No.RZ-B-2, Raghu Nagar, Pankha Road, Dabri, he and his associates committed decoity and deprived the complainant Smt.Seema Shar...
Tag this Judgment!Noor Mohammad and anr. Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:23. 01.2014 + W.P.(C) 8011/2009 NOOR MOHAMMAD AND ANR. ..... Petitioners versus UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners: Mr C. Mukund, Ms Firdouse Qutb Wani, Ms Ekta Bhasin & Mr Abhilash Attri, Advs. for petitioner no.1 For the Respondents: Mr Amitesh Kumar, Adv. for Resp. No.2/ UGC. Mr M.A. Siddiqui, Mr Varun & Mr Rohit, Advs. for R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J CM No.485/2014 (u/s 151 of CPC by Resp. No.3/ JMI) 1. This is an application moved on behalf of respondent no.3/ Jamia Milia Islamia (JMI) to seek vacation of the interim order dated 08.08.2013. By virtue of the interim order dated 08.08.2013, petitioner no.1 has continued in service beyond his usual age of superannuation, which is 62 years. I am informed that, petitioner no.1 reached the age of 62 years on 31.08.2013.2. The facts, in this writ petition need not be gone into in de...
Tag this Judgment!Shikha Mishra and ors. Vs. S. Krishnamurthy
Court: Delhi
.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on: January 23, 2014 + TR.P.(C) 25/2012 & I.A. No.18693/2012 SHIKHA MISHRA & ORS. Through ..... Petitioners Ms.Geeta Luthra, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Attin Shankar Rastogi, Adv. versus S KRISHNAMURTHY Through ..... Respondent Mr.Rajat Aneja, Adv. with Mr.Ishaan Chhaya, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. Admittedly the respondent earlier filed a suit against the petitioners for recovery of possession, arrears of rent, damages and mesne profit in respect of the suit premises which is pending before the learned Civil Judge, Saket Courts, New Delhi. In the said suit, evidence of the respondent has already been concluded. The matter is fixed for petitioners evidence.2. It is not denied by the petitioners that the petitioner No.1 was inducted as tenant in the suit premises by the deceased wife of the respondent by virtue of a Lease Deed dated 25th February, 1987 at the monthly rent of `2,000/-.3. Upon knowle...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :23. d January, 2014 + CRL.A.No.7/2012 & Crl.M.B.95/2014 SANJAY KUMAR ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Shailendra Babbar, Advocate. VERSUS STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Sanjay Kumar (the appellant) has preferred the present appeal to challenge his conviction under Sections 308/452 IPC by a judgment dated 12.12.2011 in Sessions Case No.110/09 arising out of FIR No.467/07 registered at Police Station Bawana. By an order on sentence dated 15.12.2011, he was awarded Rigorous Imprisonment for five years with fine `5,000/- under Section 308 IPC and Rigorous Imprisonment for three years with fine `5,000/- under Section 452 IPC.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on 28.08.2007 at about 10.45 A.M. at the house of R.K.Verma at Village Pooth Khurd, Delhi, he committed criminal trespass and inflicted injuries to Kishore. The police machinery was set into motion ...
Tag this Judgment!Denvax Cellular therapies P. Ltd. Vs. Amandeep Kaur
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Tr.P.(C) 25/2013 23rd January, 2014 DENVAX CELLULAR THERAPIES P. LTD. ......Petitioner Through: Mr. Yash Wadhwa Tiwari, Adv. VERSUS AMANDEEP KAUR Through: ...... Respondent Mr. Sameer Mendiratta, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. There is a request for adjournment in this petition which is for transfer under Section 24 CPC. Considering the facts of the present case, and especially, the order passed by this Court on 29.8.2013, I am not inclined to adjourn the case because if a new counsel appears, especially accepting a brief knowing that counsel will be out of station, no adjournment can be sought. The order dated 29.8.2013 reads as under: The learned counsel for the respondent puts in appearance and seeks time to file reply. Let the reply be filed within four weeks with an advance copy to learned counsel for the respondent who may file a response thereto with...
Tag this Judgment!Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Vs. Manjinder Singh
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.L.P. 310 of 2013 DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Advocate. versus MANJINDER SINGH Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Dhruv Gupta, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER2301.2014 1. This is a petition seeking leave to appeal against the impugned judgment dated 14th February 2013 passed by Special Judge, NDPS in Sessions Case No.18A/08 acquitting the Respondent of the offences under Sections 21 and 27A of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).2. The case of the prosecution is that on 6th October 2007 an intelligence was gathered by Shri Diwakar Joshi, (PW1), an Intelligence Officer of Directorate of Revenue (DRI), through a reliable source that the Respondent, carrying narcotic drugs, would be coming in a Bolero Jeep at HP Petrol Pump, Mahipal Pur, near Radisson Hotel, New Delhi, at around 10.00 p.m. The intelligence was reduced to writing, placed before the senior o...
Tag this Judgment!Food Corporation of India, Moga Vs. M/S Dashmesh Rice and Genl Mills a ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order decided on: January 23, 2014 + O.M.P. No.826/2011 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, MOGA ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Mohan Lal Sharma, Adv. versus M/S DASHMESH RICE & GENL MILLS & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr.Arijeet Singh, Adv. with Ms.Deepali Dwivedi & Mr.Siddharth Dutta, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The Food Corporation of India, petitioner herein, has filed the objections, inter-alia, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, called the Act) against the award dated 30th June, 2011 passed by the learned sole Arbitrator, Honble Mr. Justice (Retd.) R.L.Gupta.2. During the pendency of the arbitration proceedings, the respondents filed objections under Section 16 of the Act in view of the order passed by the Supreme Court of India dated 17th July, 2003 for rejection of the reference. In para 5 of the said petition, the following statement was made:5. That the all...
Tag this Judgment!