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.
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...
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...
Goverdhan Dass and anr. Vs. Union of India and anr.
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...
Arvind Singhal and ors. Vs. Leela Ram and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
$~R-10 & R-11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:13. 11.2014 + MAC.APP. 400/2006 ARVIND SINGHAL AND ORS. ..... Appellant Through Ms.Navneet Goyal, Advocate versus LEELA RAM AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr.S.L.Gupta and Mr.Ram Ashray, Advocates for R-3/Insurance Company + MAC.APP. 404/2006 ARVIND SINGHAL ..... Appellant Through Ms.Navneet Goyal, Advocate versus LEELA RAM AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr.S.L.Gupta and Mr.Ram Ashray, Advocates for R-3/Insurance Company CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. By the present order I shall dispose of MAC.APP.No.400/2006 and 404/2006. Both arise out of a common Award and pertain to the same accident and to members of the same family.2. I will first take up MAC.APP.400/2006. It pertains to claim petition No.496/2003 pertaining to the death of Smt. Gunjan Singhal.3. The brief facts which led to the filing of the claim petition are that the appellant No.1 who is the husband of deceased G...
State Vs. Radhey Shyam @ Radhey
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2014
$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision :13. h November, 2014 % + CRL.L.P. 202/2011 STATE Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. Neeraj Kumar Singh, APP for the State with SI Roshan Lal PS Nangloi versus RAHDEY SHYAM @ RADHEY Through : None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRATIBHA RANI, J.(ORAL) Crl.M.A. No.4970/2011 (Condonation of delay) 1. This is an application moved on behalf of the State/Petitioner praying for condonation of delay of 300 days in filing the present leave petition.2. For the reasons given in the application, the delay in filing the present leave petition is condoned.3. Application stands disposed of. Crl.L.P. No.202/2011 1. Being aggrieved by the acquittal of the Respondent/Accused Radhey Shyam @ Radhey in Sessions Case No.117/08, FIR No.666/2007, under Section 363 IPC (Sections 366/376 IPC added later on), P.S.Nangloi, Delhi, the State is seeking leave to appeal under Section 378 (3) Cr.P.C. against the judgment/order dat...
Kishan Lal Vs. Provident Fund Inspector
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
$~57 to 98 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:12. h November, 2014 % + CRL. M.C. Nos. 3728/2014, 3737/2014, 3738/3014, 3740/2014, 3741/2014, 3742/2014, 3743/2014, 3745/2014, 3746/2014, 3747/2014, 3748/2014, 3750/2014, 3751/2014, 3752/2014, 3753/2014, 3755/2014, 4310/2014, 4315/2014, 4319/2014, 4321/2014, 4322/2014, 4323/2014, 4324/2014, 4326/2014, 4327/2014, 4328/2014, 4329/2014, 4331/2014, 4332/2014, 4333/2014, 4334/2014, 4338/2014, 4339/2014, 4341/2014 KISHAN LAL Through: Mr. Bhavesh Advocate. 3739/2014, 3744/2014, 3749/2014, 3754/2014, 4320/2014, 4325/2014, 4330/2014, 4336/2014, ..... Petitioner Kumar Sharma, versus PROVIDENT FUND INSPECTOR Through: ..... Respondent Mr. K.R. Chawla, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.P.VAISH VED PRAKASH VAISH, J.: (ORAL) 1. By filing the present petitions under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) the petitioner seeks quashing of complaint case under paragaraph 7 & 8 of Employ...
Dhruv Dev Vs. Union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:12. h November, 2014 + LA.APP. 159/2014 DHRUV DEV Through: ..... Appellant Mr. M.C. Verma, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocate for respondent No.1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (Oral) C.M. No.13496/2014 (u/O9Rule 9 r/w Sec. 151 CPC) Restoration of the accompanying appeal is sought by this application as it was dismissed in default on 17th July, 2014. The reasons stated in paragraphs No.6 to 9 of the instant application provide sufficient cause to allow this application and it is therefore allowed and the accompanying appeal is restored to its original position. Application is disposed of. C.M. No.4790/2014 (Condonation of delay) & LA.APP No.159/2014 The delay in filing the accompanying appeal is of about three years. LA.APP No.159/2014 Page 1 A vain effort is made by appellants counsel to explain the inordinate delay by assertin...
Babita Alias Kavita Vs. Manoj Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 12, 2014 + CM(M) 1006/2014 & C.M.No.18444/2014 BABITA ALIAS KAVITA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. R.N.Dubey, Advocate versus MANOJ KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT ORAL % Petitioner is the wife of respondent, who had sought divorce from respondent and the said petition is pending before the concerned Family Court. The grievance made in this petition is that petitioners application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is pending since August, 2013. Attention of this Court has been drawn to Annexure P-3 (colly) i.e. the various order sheets of the trial court. Vide impugned order of 6 th September, 2014, petitioners application for early hearing has been dismissed by the concerned family court by noting that there is pendency of about four thousand cases. It may be so but application under Section 24 of the Hindu CM(M) No.372/2014 Page 1 Marriage Act is to be acco...
Beant Singh Vs. Compack Enterprises India (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.M.(M) No.193/2013 12th November, 2014 % BEANT SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. H.S. Uppal, Advocate. Versus COMPACK ENTERPRISES INDIA (P) LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajesh Banati, Advocate with Ms. Deeksha Rao, 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/Additional District Judge dated 19.9.2012 by which the trial court dismissed the application of the petitioner/plaintiff under Order XII Rule 6 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).2. By the application under Order XII Rule 6 CPC, petitioner/plaintiff prayed that the suit for recovery of possession of the tenanted/licenced premises being ground floor of the property bearing no.B60, G.T. Karnal Road, Industrial Area, Delhi-110033 be decreed.3. In Delhi, the suits for possession have to be decreed where ther...
Smt. Prakash Kaur Chadha & Ors. Vs. Smt. Sudesh Mehta & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.M.(M) No.1305/2011 12th November, 2014 % SMT. PRAKASH KAUR CHADHA & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through Mr.Arun Batta, Advocate. versus SMT. SUDESH MEHTA & ANR. Through ..... Respondents Mr.Anil Kher, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Kunal Kher and Mr.Ankur Gosain, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioners/landlords impugning the judgment of the Additional Rent Control Tribunal dated 10.8.2011 by which the Additional Rent Control Tribunal/first appellate court has set aside the judgment of the Additional Rent Controller/Original Court dated 12.8.2008, and dismissed the eviction petition filed by the present petitioners on the ground of subletting under Section 14(1)(b) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). CM(M) No.1305/2011 page 1 of 15 2. The tenante...
- ‹ Prev
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- Next ›
- Last »