Delhi Court October 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 10 of about 220 results (0.024 seconds)Sh. Paras Gulati Vs. Sh. Ram Chander
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.M.(M) No.725/2013 and C.M. Nos.11010/2013 & 13661/2013 29th October, 2014 % SH. PARAS GULATI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Atul Ahuja, Advocate. Versus SH. RAM CHANDER Through: ..... Respondent Mr. M. Babar, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the plaintiff impugning the order of the trial court dated 15.5.2013 by which the trial court has allowed the application filed by the respondent/defendant under Order IX Rule 13 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and has set aside the ex parte decree of possession dated 5.7.2008.2. The subject suit was a suit for possession filed by the petitioner/plaintiff against the defendant/respondent claiming possession with respect to suit shop no.7, 3159, Bedonpura, Karol Bagh, New Delhi110005. In this suit, the defendant is stated to have been serve...
Tag this Judgment!Kuldeep Gulwani Vs. Babita Chawla
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.6/2013 29th October, 2014 % KULDEEP GULWANI Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Amit Chadha, Adv. VERSUS BABITA CHAWLA Through: ...... Respondent Mr. B.B.Sawhney, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Lakshay Sawhney, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner/objector against the judgments passed by the executing court and the first appellate court; dated 12.1.2012 and 9.8.2012 respectively; by which objections filed by the petitioner against the execution of judgment and decree dated 10.8.2009 have been dismissed.2. The memo of parties in the suit reads as under: IN THE COURT OF MS.RAVUBDER BEDI: JSCC CUM ASCJ CUM GUARDIAN JUDGE (SOUTH): PATIALA HOUSE COURTS: NEW DELHI CS-983/09 Smt. Babita Chawla wife of Shri Trilok Chawla R/o 4-IV/9, Old Double Storey, Lajpat Nagar IV, New Delhi 11 00 24 ... Plain...
Tag this Judgment!Surjeet Kaur Vs. Jagdish Kohli
Court: Delhi
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:29. h October, 2014 + FAO782012 & C.M.APPLs.2917/2012 & 19033/2013 SURJEET KAUR Through: ..... Appellant Mr. D.S. Paweriya, Advocate with Mr. Aashish Minocha, Advocate versus JAGDISH KOHLI Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjeev Goswami, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR SUNIL GAUR, J.(ORAL) This petition pertains to grant of visitation rights in respect of Master-Shivam Kohli aged about 13 years. Vide impugned order of 7th September, 2009, the concerned Guardian Judge, Delhi has granted visitation rights to respondent, which are assailed in this petition. At the hearing of this petition, learned counsel for the parties inform that the subject matter of this petition as well as other litigation between the parties stands mutually resolved vide Compromise Deed of 9th January, 2014 and its photocopy has been placed on record. It is also agreed by the parties that in view of the aforesaid Compromise Deed, this peti...
Tag this Judgment!Vivek Mehta Vs. Vijay Sah and ors
Court: Delhi
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on 29th October, 2014 + RFA2942014 VIVEK MEHTA Through ..... Appellant : Mr. Darpan Wadhwa and Mr. Nakul Sachdeva, Advs. versus VIJAY SAH & ORS Through ..... Respondents :Mr. Arun Kr. Gupta and Mr. Achal Gupta, Advs. for respondent nos. 2 and 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.(ORAL) 1. By the order impugned in this appeal trial court has allowed the application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) of respondent nos. 2 and 3 and has rejected the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 (a). Meaning thereby, trial court has rejected the plaint on the ground that it does not disclose any cause of action.2. It is trite law that for the purpose of disposal of an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC the Court has to only consider the averments made in the plaint and the documents annexed therewith. Defence of the defendant, as contained in the written statement or in the application under Order 7 Rul...
Tag this Judgment!Special Art School Vs. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and o ...
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. h October, 2014 % + LPA No.602/2014 SPECIAL ART SCHOOL Through: .. Appellant Mr. Sanjay Sharawat & Mr. Ratish Kumar, Advs. Versus GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY & ORS. .. Respondents Through: Mr. Mukul Talwar with Mr. Sradhananda Mohapatra & Mr. Vipin Singh, Advs. for GGSIPU. Ms. Nikhita Khetrapal, Adv. for R-2. Mr. Arun Birbal with Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advs. for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. This appeal came up before us first on 16th September, 2014 when the following order was passed:2. This intra-court appeal impugns the order dated 8th September, 2014 of the learned Single Judge of this Court of allowing Review Petition No.409/2014 (in W.P.(C) No.5461/2014 filed by the appellant) filed by the respondent no.1 University, thereby reviewing the order dated 29th August, 2014.3. The counsel for the respondent no.1 University, the counsel for the res...
Tag this Judgment!Attar Singh Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on 29th October, 2014 + FAO2642012 ATTAR SINGH ..... Appellant Through Ms Rupika Singh, Adv. for Mr Navneet Goyal, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through Ms Priyanka Terdal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.(ORAL) 1. Appellant filed a claim petition before the Railway Claims Tribunal seeking compensation of four lakhs under Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989 (Act, for short), on account of injury sustained in an untoward incident relating to a train on 14th January, 2010. By the order impugned in this appeal, Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition.2. As per the appellant, on 14th January, 2010, he along with his wife was to going from Shakur Basti to Sampla. He along with his wife went to Shakur Basti Railway Station and purchased tickets. FAO2642014 Thereafter, they Page 1 of 8 reached platform no.2, in order to board Firozpur Janta Express. Platform was overcrowded. Appellant succeede...
Tag this Judgment!Kriti Bhakuni and ors. Vs. Army College of Medical Science and ors.
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. h October, 2014 % + LPA No.668/2014 KRITI BHAKUNI & ORS. Through: .. Appellants Ms. Bina Madhavan with Mr. Shivendra Singh, Advs. Versus ARMY COLLEGE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE & ORS. .. Respondents Through: Col. Balasubramanyam (Retd.) with Mr. Ankur Chibber, Advs. for R-1&4. Ms. Chanchal Sharma, Adv. for R-2. Mr. Mukul Talwar with Mr. Sradhananda Mohapatra & Mr. Vipin Singh, Advs. for GGSIPU. CORAM:HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 This intra-court appeal impugns the order dated 9th September, 2014 of the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No.5842/2014 filed by the appellants, of refusing interim stay of the Communication dated 23rd May, 2014 of the respondent no.1 College (impugned in the writ petition) hiking the tuition fee by 51%, though however permitting the appellants to pay 50% of the fee due by 25th September, 2014, 25% with 6% interest by 15th December, 2014 ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Tola Ram and Sons and anr. Vs. State Bank of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.M.(M) No.1072/2011 and C.M. No.6284/2012 29th October, 2014 % M/S. TOLA RAM & SONS & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. S.C. Juneja, Advocate. Versus STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. P. Gowthan, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order of the trial court dated 20.5.2011 by which the trial court allowed the application of the petitioner/plaintiff in a limited manner i.e allowed certain evidence to be led on behalf of the petitioner/plaintiff but rejected the prayer for the other evidence.2. Before me, counsel for the petitioner confines the relief to leading of evidence of only one witness namely Sh. V.N. Sehgal to prove the original of the counterfoils of the deposit slips issued by the defendant/respondent no.1-bank itself.3. It has been held by the Suprem...
Tag this Judgment!Ranjana Bhatia Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and anr
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. 10.2014 W.P.(C) 2210/2010 & CM30882014 RANJANA BHATIA ..... Petitioner versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Ravinder Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr Rajiv Kumar Ghawana, Mr Pramod Kumar Dubey, Mr A S Rathore and Ms Namita Wali. For the Respondents : Mr Siddharth Panda and Mr Sahu for LAC/L&B. Ms Karuna Chhatwal with Mr J Sukhija for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. Originally this petition was filed challenging the notice dated 07.01.2010 issued under the signatures of respondent No.2 purportedly under Section 17(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act). The petition was also directed against the order dated 03.04.2010 passed by respondent No.2. It is pertinent to note that earlier an Award No.2193 dated 13.01.1969 h...
Tag this Judgment!Madhusudan Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:28. 10.2014 W.P.(C) 5944/2013 MADHUSUDAN ..... Petitioner versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr B.S. Maan with Mr Vishal Maan. For the Respondents : Mr Sanjay Kumar Pathak Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi for R-2/LAC. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition concerns the acquisition proceedings which were commenced by the issuance of a notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) on 04.02.1988. The subject lands are situated in mustatil No.54, killa No.2/2/2 min.(1-09), 9 min (3-11), 10/1 (2-01), 12 (4-12), 19/1 (014), in all measuring 12 bighas and 7 biswas, situated in the revenue estate of village Bharthal, New Delhi.2. Earlier the petitioner had filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) 280...
Tag this Judgment!