Delhi Court November 2014 Judgments
Smt. Iva Nandi Vs. Sh. Suresh Toshniwal & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.M.(M) No.1007/2014 & C.M.Nos.18466/2014 (Stay), 18467/2014 (Exemption) 12th November, 2014 % SMT. IVA NANDI Through versus ..... Petitioner Mr.S.K.Bhaduri, Advocate. SH. SURESH TOSHNIWAL & ORS. Through CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA ..... Respondents To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Challenge by means of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the impugned order of the trial court dated 06.9.2014 which has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure Act, 1908 (CPC). By the application under Section 151 CPC the petitioner/plaintiff sought direction to the respondents/defendants to disclose the names of the buyers to whom the suit property was sold.2. In reply to the application, the respondents/defendants stated that they are still in possession of the suit property, and they had not transferred the posse...
Tag this Judgment!M/S India Infoline Ltd & Anr Vs. State & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5084/2014 M/S INDIA INFOLINE LTD & ANR Through Mr. Kapil Gupta, Advocate. ..... Petitioners versus STATE & ANR Through ..... Respondents Mr. Amit Ahlawat, Additional Public Prosecutor. Inspector Satish Kumar. Complainant in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.A. Nos.17400/2014 & 17401/2014 Exemptions, as prayed, are allowed, subject to all just exceptions. These applications are disposed off. Crl.M.C. 5084/2014 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No.122/2011 registered under Sections 406, 120-B, 34 IPC at Police Station Economic Offences Wing, on 27.06.2011, on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties.2. Issue notice.3. Mr. Amit Ahlawat, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, enters appearance and accepts notice. The complainant Babu Lal Rustagi, who is arrayed as respondent No.2 herein, is present in person, and...
Tag this Judgment!Sneh Lata Vs. Ashok Kumar Dhull
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:12. h November, 2014 + MAT. APP. No.97/2007 SNEH LATA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. R.P.Sharma & Mr. Shivendu Kaushik, Advocates versus ASHOK KUMAR DHULL Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Pankaj Vivek, Ms. Anupriya Singh & Mr. Atul Tripathi, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Appellant is the wife, who assails impugned judgment of 7th September, 2007 vide which respondent-husband has been granted divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. The factual matrix of this case has already been spelt out in the opening paragraph of the impugned judgment and needs no reiteration. Suffice it would be to note that parties were married on 8 th June, 1980 in Delhi and of the three children born out of this wedlock, unfortunately one son expired on 4th June, 2000, thus, the parties presently have one living daughter and one son. Appellant is a primary teacher in MCD and respondent is also a teacher. According t...
Tag this Judgment!Shanti Devi & Ors. Vs. Parvinder
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 12, 2014 + RSA3302014 SHANTI DEVI & ORS. Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Manish Vats & Mr. Sandeep Gupta, Advocates versus PARVINDER ..... Respondent Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % C.M.No.18494/2014 (u/S151CPC) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. C.M.No.18493/2014 (u/S5of the Limitation Act) Delay of thirty days in filing the accompanying application is condoned for the reasons stated in the application. Application is disposed of. RSA No.330/2014 & C.M.No.18492/2014 (stay) After framing of issues on an application under Section 151 of CPC, trial court has dismissed respondents suit for possession and permanent injunction. However, the First Appellate Court has reversed the findings of the trial court and has restored respondent-plaintiffs suit RSA No.330/2014 Page 1 for being tried in accordance with the law while holding as under:The counsel for the respondents No.2 to 8 has...
Tag this Judgment!Sunil Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of hearing and Order:12. h November 2014 + W.P.(C) 4564/2013 SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sarvesh Biswas, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI ORDER % KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(Oral) 1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the issuance of a writ of certiorari against the final judgment and order dated 8.2.2010 passed by the learned Armed Force Tribunal, New Delhi passed in T.A. No.318/2010.2. The limited issue raised by the petitioner in the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is that the respondents have failed to accede to his request for grant of disability pension. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is entitled to the grant of disability pension as on the date of his medical ex...
Tag this Judgment!Jaganath & Ors Vs. State & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4303/2014 JAGANATH & ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Manish Sharma, Advocate with petitioners in person. versus STATE & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with SI Renuka PS Tilak Nagar. Complainant in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % ORDER1211.2014 Crl. M.A. No.14876/2014 (for exemption) Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed off. CRL.M.C. 4303/2014 1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.671/2004 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at Police Station Tilak Nagar on 28th August, 2004 on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.2. Issue notice. Mr. Amit Ahlawat, Additional Public Prosecutor enters appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the State/respondent No.1.3. Petitioners as well as complainant/respondent No.2-Meena are ...
Tag this Judgment!Vidya Devi Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
$~10 & 11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:12. h November, 2014 % + BAIL APPLN. 2107/2014 ATTAR SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Pradeep Arya with Mr. Narinder Chaudhary and Mr. Praveen Dabas, Advocates. versus STATE Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for the State. BAIL APPLN. 2108/2014 VIDYA DEVI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Pradeep Arya with Mr. Narinder Chaudhary and Mr. Praveen Dabas, Advocates. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.P.VAISH VED PRAKASH VAISH, J.(ORAL) These two applications filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.) on behalf of the applicants who seek anticipatory bail in case FIR No.247/2014 under Sections 302/34 IPC registered at P.S. Kanjhawala, Delhi. Since both these applications are arising out of the same FIR, these are being taken up together for disposal. Learned counsel for the applicants subm...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. P N Arora & 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. 74/2014 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocate versus P N ARORA & ANR. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. D.P. Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No.2-DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (Oral) Impugned judgment grants compensation for A category of land @ `16,74,500/- per acre with consequential benefits to respondent in respect of his land situated in village Holambi Kalan, Delhi, which was acquired vide Notification of 22nd August, 2001, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Learned counsel for appellant fairly concedes that costs imposed vide order of 17th February, 2014 have not yet been paid and undertakes on behalf of appellant that cost of `500/- would be deposited with the Advocates Welfare Fund within six weeks. Let it be so done. Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned judgment which relies upon a decision ...
Tag this Judgment!Urmila Tyagi & Ors Vs. Akbar Khan & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
$~A-44. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:12.11.2014 + MAC.APP. 826/2012 URMILA TYAGI & ORS Through ..... Appellant Mr. Subhash Kamboj, Advocate versus AKBAR KHAN & ORS Through ..... Respondent Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. The present appeal has been filed seeking to impugn the Award dated 12.04.2012. The brief facts leading to filing of the claim petition by the appellants are that on 15.12.2005, the deceased Vijender Kumar Tyagi was going with Mr. Rinku i.e.Nitin Tyagi in a Maruti Zen Car. Near Akrabad Petrol Pump they were hit by a truck said to be driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1. The occupants of the car were grievously injured. Later on, Mr. Vijender Kumar Tyagi succumbed to his injuries.2. On the issue of negligence of respondent No.1, the driver of the offending truck, the tribunal noted the evidence of PW2 Mr. Nitin Tyagi who was an eye witness. The tribunal also noted abo...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Pandey & Ors Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3805/2014 Decided on :12. 11.2014 IN THE MATTER OF SANJAY PANDEY & ORS ..... Petitioners Through : Mr. Sanjeev Rajpal, Advocate versus CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES ..... Respondent Through : Mr. R.V. Sinha and Mr. A.S. Sinha, Advocates CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners praying inter alia for quashing the order dated 12.11.2013, passed by the respondent/CBDT, declining to promote them w.e.f. 23.9.2010, the date when the DPC was held.2. On 24.9.2014, it was recorded that the petitioners, who were working on the post of Additional Commissioners of Income Tax, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, have a grievance that the respondent/CBDT has violated the order dated 6.7.2012 passed by the Division Bench in a batch of writ petitions filed by them, including WP(C)No.8017/2010 filed against the order dated 2.11.2010 passed by the Central Administrative T...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- Next ›
- Last »