Delhi Court October 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 13 of about 220 results (0.019 seconds)Union of India Vs. Jaiwanti and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. h October, 2014 % + LA.APP. 234/2013 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocate versus JAIWANTI & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Sriti Bisoi, Advocate for respondent No.2-DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Sunil Gaur, J (ORAL) C.M.No.15621/2014 (for delay) The stand taken in paragraph No.3 of the instant application discloses bureaucratic lethargy, which has caused delay of 244 days in filing the accompanying appeal. Applying the parameters governing condonation of delay, as reiterated by the Apex Court in Esha Bhattacharjee Vs. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC649 to the instant case, I find that the delay occasioned has not been satisfactorily explained. Hence, this application is dismissed. LA.APP. 234/2013 & C.M.No.15620/2013 (for stay) Impugned judgment grants compensation for A category of land LA.APP.NO.234/2013 Page 1 @ `19,43,500/- per acre...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Shashi Aggarwal and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. h October, 2014 + LA.APP. 223/2014 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Advocate versus SHASHI AGGARWAL & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. D.P. Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No.2-DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Sunil Gaur, J (ORAL) Learned counsel for appellant submits that the costs imposed vide order of 25th April, 2014 shall be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee positively within twelve weeks. Let it be so positively done, failing which the costs be recovered from appellant in accordance with the law. Impugned judgment grants compensation @ `12,96,455.89/- per acre with consequential benefits in respect of respondents land situated in village Shahbad Daulatpur, Delhi acquired vide Notification of 27th October, 1999, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Upon hearing and perusal of record, this Court finds that th...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Ramesh Kumar and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. h October, 2014 % + LA.APP. 211/2013 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Advocate versus RAMESH KUMAR & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. M.K. Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2-DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Sunil Gaur, J (ORAL) The stand taken in paragraph No.3 of the instant application discloses bureaucratic lethargy, which has caused delay of 236 days in filing the accompanying appeal. Applying the parameters governing condonation of delay, as reiterated by the Apex Court in Esha Bhattacharjee Vs. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC649 to the instant case, I find that the delay occasioned has not been satisfactorily explained. Hence, this application is dismissed. LA.APP. 211/2013 & C.M.No.15298/2013 (for stay) Impugned judgment grants compensation for A category of land LA.APP.NO.211/2013 Page 1 @ `19,43,500/- per acre with consequential benefi...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Kandla Port Trust Vs. M/S Pec Limited
Court: Delhi
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:28. 10.2014 W.P.(C) 7887/2011 & CM Nos. 17851/2011 & 70/2013 M/S KANDLA PORT TRUST ..... Petitioner versus M/S PEC LIMITED ..... Respondent AND + W.P.(C) 7898/2011 & CM Nos. 17870/2011 & 83/2013 M/S KANDLA PORT TRUST ..... Petitioner versus M/S STC LIMITED ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Pravin N. Parekh, Sr. Advocate with Mr sumit Goel, Ms Ritika Sethi, Mr Faisal Lherwani and Mr Abhinay. For the Respondent : Mr Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Advocate with Ms Rajdipa Behera, Ms Monica Gupta. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 These writ petitions have been filed by M/s Kandla Port Trust, which is an authority constituted under the Major Port Trust Act, 1963 against two Central Public Sector Enterprises of Government of India. The principal controversy raised in the present petition is with regard to the legality and validity of the Permanent Machinery of Arbitrat...
Tag this Judgment!Subhash Chand Phull Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. h October, 2014 + Crl.M.B.1008/2014 in CRL.A. 617/2014 SUBHASH CHAND PHULL Through: ..... Appellant Mr Suresh Tripathy Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Jasbir Kaur, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State alongwith SI Bupender Singh Police Station AC. Branch. % CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.Crl.M.B.1008/2014 (for suspension of sentence) 1. This is an application moved by the appellant seeking suspension of his sentence and grant of bail during the pendency of the appeal. The appellant has been convicted u/s 7/13(1)d, 13(2) of PC Act read with Section 120B of IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 4 years and fine of Rs.50,000, in default simple imprisonment for 6 months u/s 7 of PC Act; RI of 2 years and fine of Rs.25,000, in default SI of 2 months u/s120B IPC; 3 years RI and fine of Rs.50,000, in default SI for 6 months u/s 7 of PC Act read with Section 120B;...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Sumer Chand (Deceased) and ors
Court: Delhi
$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. h October, 2014 % + LA.APP. 227/2013 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocate versus SUMER CHAND (DECEASED) & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Sriti Bisoi, Advocate for respondent No.2-DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Sunil Gaur, J (ORAL) C.M.No.15391/2013 (for delay) The stand taken in paragraph No.3 of the instant application discloses bureaucratic lethargy, which has caused delay of 208 days in filing the accompanying appeal. Applying the parameters governing condonation of delay, as reiterated by the Apex Court in Esha Bhattacharjee Vs. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC649 to the instant case, I find that the delay occasioned has not been satisfactorily explained. Hence, this application is dismissed. LA.APP. 227/2013 & C.M.No.15390/2013 (for stay) Impugned judgment grants compensation for A category of land LA.APP.NO.227/2013 Page 1 @ `11,41,...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Ishwar Chand and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. h October, 2014 % + LA.APP. 224/2014 & C.M. No.7079/2014 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocate versus ISHWAR CHAND & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. D.P. Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No.2-DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Sunil Gaur, J (ORAL) Learned counsel for appellant submits that the costs imposed vide order of 25th April, 2014 shall be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee positively within twelve weeks. Let it be so positively done, failing which the costs be recovered from appellant in accordance with the law. Impugned judgment grants compensation @ `16,74,500/- per acre with consequential benefits in respect of respondents land situated in village Bhorgarh, Delhi acquired vide Notification of 2nd August, 2001, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Upon hearing and perusal of record, this Court finds tha...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Jitender Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. h October, 2014 % + LA.APP. 217/2013 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocate versus . JITENDER KUMAR & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. M.K. Singh, Advocate for respondent No.7-DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Sunil Gaur, J (ORAL) C.M.No.15342/2013 (for delay) The stand taken in paragraph No.3 of the instant application discloses bureaucratic lethargy, which has caused delay of 235 days in filing the accompanying appeal. Applying the parameters governing condonation of delay, as reiterated by the Apex Court in Esha Bhattacharjee Vs. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC649 to the instant case, I find that the delay occasioned has not been satisfactorily explained. Hence, this application is dismissed. LA.APP. 217/2013 & C.M.No.15341/2013 (for stay) Impugned judgment grants compensation for A category of land LA.APP.NO.217/2013 Page 1 @ `16,16,500/- p...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Ram Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. h October, 2014 % + LA.APP. 225/2014 & C.M. No.7082/2014 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocate versus RAM SINGH & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. D.P. Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No.2-DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Sunil Gaur, J (ORAL) Learned counsel for appellant submits that the costs imposed vide order of 25th April, 2014 shall be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee positively within twelve weeks. Let it be so positively done, failing which the costs be recovered from appellant in accordance with the law. Impugned judgment grants compensation @ `12,85,628/- per acre with consequential benefits in respect of respondents land situated in village Prehladpur, Delhi acquired vide Notification of 27th October, 1999, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Upon hearing and perusal of record, this Court finds th...
Tag this Judgment!Devender Kumar Vs. State (Govt of Nct of Delhi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2116/2013 Date of decision:28. h October, 2014 DEVENDER KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Lalit Naryan Singh, Adv. versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & Ors. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Parveen Bhati, APP for the State Mr. N. Hariharan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ankit Kalu, Adv. for Respondents No.2 to 5 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH VED PRAKASH VAISH, J.(ORAL) CRL.M.A. 8242/2013 The application is allowed subject to just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. CRL.M.C. 2116/2013 1. By way of the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C. for short) the petitioner Devender Kumar has challenged the order dated 12.4.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Saket Court, New Delhi whereby criminal revision filed by the petitioner against the Crl.M.C. No.2116/2034 page 1 of 6 order dated 04.02.2013 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate...
Tag this Judgment!