Delhi Court November 2014 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.
Makisu Vs. State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 535 of 2008 MOHD. ISAF (IN J.C.) ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sheikh Imran Alam and Mr. Usman Chaudhary, Advocates. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, Advocate With CRL.A. 691 of 2008 MAKISU ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sheikh Imran Alam and Mr. Usman Chaudhary, Advocates versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, Advocate With CRL.A. 576 of 2008 IRFAN ALI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sheikh Imran Alam and Mr. Usman Chaudhary, Advocates versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER1311.2014 1. These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 21st May 2008, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) convicting the Appellants for the offence under Sections 328/354/380/506/34 IPC, and additionally convicting the Appellant in Criminal Appeal No.(Crl.A.No). 691/2008, f...
Union of India Vs. Mahender Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:13. 11.2014 + W.P. (C) 12289/2009 UNION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Digpaul, Advocate. versus MAHENDER SINGH ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S.K. Gupta, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The Union of India is aggrieved by an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereafter referred to as CAT) dated 6.11.2008 in OA7872008. By the impugned order, the CAT had directed the Union to strike off/quash column nos.9 & 12 of the Recruitment Rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India in 2005, in respect of the category of Laboratory Assistants to the extent they are applicable to 50% promotional quota.2. The facts necessary for deciding this case are that the respondents/applicants were working as group D employees; they are 30 in number. They underwent the one year service training course from the Safdarjung Hospi...
W.N.Gujral Vs. Smt. Kavita Chhibber
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 651/2014 % 13th November , 2014 W.N.GUJRAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.I.D.Tyagi with Mr.Milan Tyagi, Advocates. versus SMT. KAVITA CHHIBBER Through: ..... Respondent Dr.Chaudhary Shamsuddin Khan with Ms.Pushpa Chibger, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1 The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order of the trial court dated 10.5.2014 by which the trial court has rejected an application under Order XII Rule 6 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) filed by the petitioner/plaintiff in a suit for possession. The subject suit for possession was filed by the petitioner/plaintiff stating that there is a relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, rate of rent is more than Rs.3,500/- per month that is Rs.10,000/- per month, and the monthly tenancy was terminated by a legal notice dated 4.10.2013 sent under...
Union of India Vs. Goverdhan Dass & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:13. h November, 2014 + LA.APP. 790/2006 GOVERDHAN DASS & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. S.K.Rout & Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through: + ..... Respondents Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak & Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Advocates for UoI/LAC LA.APP. 46/2010 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak & Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Advocates for UoI/LAC versus GOVERDHAN DASS & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. S.K.Rout & Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (Oral) With the consent of both sides, the above-captioned two appeals were heard together as they are directed against common impugned judgment of 29th April, 2006 and are being disposed of by this common LA.APP. Nos. 790/2006 & 46/2010 Page 1 judgment. For the planned development of Delhi, land of appellantsGoverdhan Dass & Murli Manohar, situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Mohd. Pur, Munirka, Delhi w...
S.D.Hada Vs. PravIn Kumar Aggarwal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % EFA-12/2013 13th November , 2014 S.D.HADA Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Muneesh Malhotra, Adv. VERSUS PRAVIN KUMAR AGGARWAL Through: ...... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The objector/petitioner by this execution first appeal takes exception to the impugned order of the executing court dated 22.3.2013 which has dismissed the objections filed by the objector/petitioner and has directed execution of the money decree of Rs.6,74,733/- against the Judgment Debtor (JD) who has not been impleaded as a respondent in these proceedings and which JD is the son of the present objector/petitioner.2. The executing court notes that no warrants of attachment have been issued against the immovable property being Hada Farm, 30, Rajokri Road, Samalkha, New Delhi but the warrants of attachment have been issued only against the movable properties therein of the JD because...
Uoi Vs. Mukul Gaur
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO1622013 and CM Appl. No.5498/2013 Decided on 13th November, 2014 ..... Appellant UOI Through :Ms. Rashmi Malhotra and Ms. Priyanka Bharihoke, Advs. versus MUKUL GAUR ..... Respondent Through : Ms. Rupika Singh, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.(ORAL) 1. Respondent, through his father, filed an application under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (the Act, for short) before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Delhi seeking compensation of `4,00,000/- from the appellant in respect of the injuries suffered by him in an accident relating to 2DPM passenger train on 15th November, 2009 at about 7:30 pm at Azadpur railway station. At the time of filing of petition appellant was a minor. During pendency of the petition, respondent attained the age of majority and continued to pursue the matter. After the trial, Tribunal has awarded compensation of `2,40,000/- to respondent together with interest @ 9% per ann...
National Insurance Co Ltd Vs. Sunil Kumar and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
$~A-10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision: November 13, 2014 MAC.APP. 694/2012 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Through: ..... Appellant Mr.Pankaj Seth, Advocate versus SUNIL KUMAR AND ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Pradeep Sehrawat, Advocate alongwith Respondent No.1 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) 1. By the present appeal the appellant seeks to impugn the Award dated 04.04.2012.2. The brief facts which led to the filing of the claim petition are that Shri Sunil Kumar, respondent No.1 met with an accident on 25.11.2003. He was proceeding towards Gupta Farm, Dhansa Road, Dhansa Border, New Delhi on his Bajaj Chetak scooter. On Dhansa Border he was hit by a truck(Tata make) which came from behind and was driven by respondent No.2 [now deceased and represented by respondent No.2(a) to 2(e)]. at a very high speed in a rash and negligent manner. The offending vehicle hit the scooter and thereafter ran over the legs of responde...
Naresh Kharab Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:13. h November, 2014 BAIL APPLN. 1660/2014 NARESH KHARAB Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Geeta Luthra, Senior Advocate and Mr. Sanjeev Sahay, Mr. Narendra Goyal and Mr. Priyesh Mishra, Advocates versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Special Public Prosecutor for the State with Mr. S.K. Jha Investigating Officer and Mr. Pulkit Misra, Advocate. + BAIL APPLN. 1922/2014 NITIN SINHA @ NITIN SINGH @ NITIN BIHARI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil K. Mittal and Mr. Vipin K. Mittal, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Special Public Prosecutor for the State along with SI SK Jha, PS EOW/Crime Branch + BAIL APPLN. 1923/2014 NITIN SINHA @ NITIN SINGH @ NITIN BIHARI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil K. Mittal and Mr. Vipin K. Mittal, Advocates. versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Special Public Prosecutor for the State along with SI SK Jha, PS EO...
Rajesh Batra Vs. Ranbir Singh Ahlawat
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: November 13, 2014 + FAO(OS) 312/2014 RAJESH BATRA Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Tanmaya Mehta, Advocate versus RANBIR SINGH AHLAWAT ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate with Ms.Karuna Chhatwal, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. The appellant Rajesh Batra is a builder carrying on business under the name and style M/s. Shree Constructions. The respondent Ranbir Singh is the owner of a part of plot bearing Municipal No.B-39, Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi. The plot measures 400 square yards, but only 200 square yards belongs to Ranbir Singh Ahlawat and the other portion belongs to his nephew Sudhanshu Ahlawat. Original title to the plot was a lease-hold tenure in favour of Late Sh.Ram Swaroop Ahlawat, the father of the respondent. The lease-hold right was transferred by DDA in favour of the respondent and his nephew...
Navy Children School Vs. Director of Education & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
24 to 30 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) W.P.(C) W.P.(C) W.P.(C) W.P.(C) W.P.(C) W.P.(C) 7413/2014 7416/2014 7426/2014 7429/2014 7430/2014 7431/2014 7437/2014 & & & & & & & CM CM CM CM CM CM CM No.17604/2014 No.17607/2014 No.17621/2014 No.17625/2014 No.17626/2014 No.17627/2014 No.17634/2014 Date of decision:13. 11.2014 IN THE MATTER OF: NAVY CHILDREN SCHOOL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Anil Kaushik, Advocate for Ms. Shilpa Singh, Advocate versus DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Nidhi Raman, Advocate for R-1 & 2 with Mr. Nagar, DEO, Zone-26. Ms. Indrani Ghosh, Advocate for R-3. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. Ms. Indrani Ghosh, learned counsel, who had appeared for the respondents No.3 in the earlier round of litigation, states that she has instructions to appear for the respondents No.3 in the present cases as well. She submits that she shall file her power of attorney within one week. A complete set of the pape...
- ‹ Prev
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- Next ›
- Last »