Delhi Court January 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 6 of about 723 results (0.064 seconds)Aspective Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Industrial Financial Corporat ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on: January 30, 2014 + I.A. No.1771/2014 in CS(OS) No.260/2014 ASPECTIVE VANIJYA PVT LTD AND ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr.Sumit Bansal, Adv. with Mr.Ateev Mathur, Ms.Richa Oberoi & Ms.Jagriti Ahuja, Advs. versus INDUSTRIAL FINANCIAL CORPORATION OF INDIA (IFCI) LTD ..... Defendant Through Mr.P.S.Bindra, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The abovementioned suit for permanent injunction has been filed by five plaintiffs, namely, Aspective Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Subhchintak Vancom Pvt. Ltd., Snehpushp Barter Pvt. Ltd., REI Steel and Timber Pvt. Ltd. and REI Agro Limited, against the defendant, namely, Industrial Financial Corporation of India Ltd.2. The facts of the matter are that the plaintiff No.5 by letter dated 11th June, 2012 approached the defendant with a request to avail financial assistance. After considering the said request, the defendant by letter dated 27th June, 2012 agreed in princi...
Tag this Judgment!Sri NaraIn and anr. Vs. State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:21. t January, 2014 Pronounced on:30. h January, 2014 + CRL. A. 542/1998 SRI NARAIN AND ANR. Through ..... Appellants Mr. Dinesh Chander Yadav, Advocate versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) .... Respondent Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State with SI Premveer Singh, PS Sultan Puri. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT G.P. MITTAL, J.1. This appeal relates to a small dispute with very serious and painful consequences wherein a mother (Sunderi Devi) lost one of her sons (Hari Prakash) whereas the other (Sri Narain) and his wife (Smt. Savita) were sentenced to imprisonment for life for committing murder of deceased Hari Prakash.2. FIR No.512/1992 on the basis of which the appellants faced trial for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) in Sessions Case No.146 of 1996 was registered on the statement of deceased Hari Prakash, ...
Tag this Judgment!Manish Sareen Vs. Jaswant Raj Bhardwaj and ors
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % TR.P (C) No.76/2013 30th January, 2014 MANISH SAREEN Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate. versus JASWANT RAJ BHARDWAJ AND ORS Through ..... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The object of Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is not to bring about clubbing where suits are at different stages and more so when the later suit is filed by the petitioner himself who seeks clubbing.2. The suit which is filed by the petitioner is of the year 2011 whereas the suit which was filed by the respondent No.2 herein was of the year 2007. There is nothing on record of this Court as to what are the different stages of both the suits. If one suit is at an advanced stage there is no need to club a suit which is at a much later stage in view of the fact that if there are any common issues, decision in the common issues in the earlier suit will operate ...
Tag this Judgment!Ganga Sagar Chaurasia Vs. Sheela and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.115/2013 30th January, 2014 % GANGA SAGAR CHAURASIA Through: ......Appellant. counsel. (appearance not given) VERSUS SHEELA & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents. Mr. Nitin Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. On the first call, a pass-over was sought. On the second call also pass-over is prayed. It is not possible to keep on passing over matters, and counsels if they are accommodated must appear on the second call. I have therefore heard the counsel for the respondents and after perusing the record, am proceeding to decide this appeal.2. This regular second appeal is filed by the defendant-tenant against whom the courts below have decreed the suit for recovery of rent.3. The respondents-plaintiffs are admittedly the legal heirs of the original owner, and therefore their ownership really cannot be disputed by the appellant. I may note that the cour...
Tag this Judgment!Liyakat Ali Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :31. t October, 2013 DECIDED ON :30. h January, 2014 + CRL.A.99/2000 LIYAKAT ALI Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Jayant K.Sud with Mr.Ujas Kumar, Advocates with appellant present in person. versus STATE Through : ..... Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Liyakat Ali (the appellant) questions the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 29.01.1999 in Sessions Case No.25/1999 arising out of FIR No.248/1996 registered at Police Station Seema Puri by which he was convicted under Section 307/34 IPC & 27 Arms Act. By an order dated 31.01.1999, he was awarded rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine `3,000/- under Section 307 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine `1,000/- under Section 27 Arms Act. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently. The facts as projected in 2. Liyakat Ali, Akil Ahmed and Gauz Mohd. @ Taj Mohd. were arrested and sent for trial alleging that on 12.05...
Tag this Judgment!Pawan Sahani and anr. Vs. State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :30. h January, 2014 + CRL.A. 1265/2011 & CRL.M.B. 1048/2013 PAWAN SAHANI & ANR. Through : ..... Appellants Mr. Sunil Tiwari, Advocate. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. The appellants Pawan Sahani @ Sunil (A-1) and Akhtar @ Babloo (A-2) have preferred the appeal to challenge their conviction under Sections 186/353/307/34 IPC by a judgment dated 27.08.2011 in Sessions Case No.34/09 arising out of FIR No.271/06 registered at Police Station S.P.Badli. By an order on sentence dated 01.09.2011, they were awarded rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine `5,000/- each under Section 307 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for three months with fine `500/- under Section 186 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine `1,000/- under Section 353 IPC. The sentences were to operate concurrently.2. Allegations against the appellants were that on 0...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Yodhad Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:30. 01.2014 + Crl.Appeal No.392/2010 JAI YODHAD Through: .Appellant Mr. Ajay Verma and Mr. Prateek, Advs. Versus STATE Through: .Respondent Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) On 8.7.2008, SI Sunil Jain of Narcotic Branch received secret information that a person named Jai, resident of Nepal, who is engaged in bringing Ganja from Nepal to Delhi and selling the same, in association with one Norbu, will meet Norbu between 6.30 pm to 7 pm on that date at Railway Crossing, Shalimar Village and a huge quantity of Ganja would be supplied. The aforesaid information was brought by SI Sunil Jain to the notice of Inspector M.L. Sharma of Narcotic Branch and he also produced the informer before him. After making inquiries from the informer, Inspector M.L. Sharma brought the information to the notice of the concerned ACP Mr. M.S. Dabas on telephone. The said ACP directed him to conduc...
Tag this Judgment!Manju Sabharwal Vs. Arun Sabharwal
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + TR.P (C) No.67/2013 & CM121562013 % 30th January, 2014 MANJU SABHARWAL ...... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rohan Garg, Advocate. VERSUS ARUN SABHARWAL Through: ...... Respondent Respondent in person. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a petition under Section 24 CPC to transfer two cases which are pending in Tis Hazari courts since 2006-2007 being divorce cases filed by both the parties against each other to the courts at Saket.2. The only ground pleaded is the factum that the courts at Saket being nearer to the residence of the petitioner than the courts at Tis Hazari where presently the cases are pending.3. At the time of bifurcation of Delhi into nine Districts and re-allocation of work by transfer of cases, many aspects and considerations existed, including of equal distribution of work in courts, and which was for the benefit of the litigants so that in so...
Tag this Judgment!Tata Aig General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sh. Dev Kumar Prasad and anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.356/2013 30th January, 2014 % TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate. versus SH. DEV KUMAR PRASAD AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Pratima Nain Chauhan, 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) + FAO No.356/2013 and C.M. No.14257/2013 (stay) 1. This first appeal is filed by the insurance company under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 impugning the judgment passed by the Employees Commissioner dated 25.6.2013 which has allowed the compensation claim filed by employee/workman/respondent no.1 herein. the 2. The facts of the case are that the workman stated that he was employed as a driver with the respondent no.2 herein and who was the respondent no.1 before the Employees Commissioner for the vehicle bearing No.HR-55-M-1777 (truck). It was further pleaded that on 12.3.20...
Tag this Judgment!Savita and ors. Vs. Sri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:30. h January, 2014 + MAC. APP. No.57/2013 SAVITA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Appellants Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate. Versus SRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, 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 04.10.2012, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation for a sum of Rs.10,56,280/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization of the amount.2. Vide the present appeal, the appellants/claimants are seeking enhancement of the compensation amount as noted above.3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants/claimants has argued that Shri Sunil died in the accident on 16.06.2010. At that time he was 38 years old and working as a driver with some private establishment...
Tag this Judgment!