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. Shri Msh Beig
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:20. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 272/2012 & CM No.561/2012 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD ..... Petitioner versus SHRI MSH BEIG ..... Respondent AND + W.P.(C) 332/2012 & CM No.720/2012 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD ..... Petitioner versus SHRI MSH BEIG ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Mr R.S. Mathur, Mr Dinesh Mathur & Ms Jyoti Daxtidar. For the Respondent : None. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioners are insurance companies and impugn an order dated 16.08.2011 passed by the Central Information Commission (hereafter CIC) directing the Life Insurance Company as well as all four general insurance companies to disclose information in response to RTI applications as per the principles settled by the Supreme Court in CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay: (2011) 8 SCC497 2. The principal grievance of the petitioners is that the impugned order directs disclosure of certain inf...
Delhi Development Authority Vs. Metro Paint Industries
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.M.(M) No.981/2011 20th November, 2014 % DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Bansal, Advocate with Ms. D. Ray Chaudhary, Advocate. Versus METRO PAINT INDUSTRIES Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate. 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 impugns the order of the court below dated 4.3.2010 by which it has been held that the respondent herein is not bound to surrender any land to the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) pursuant to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India and Ors. (1996) 4 SCC351read with the subsequent judgments being the judgment dated 4.12.1996 reported as M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India (1997) 11 SCC327and the judgment dated 1.3.2001 in M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India and Ors. (2001) 4 SCC577 2. It is an undi...
Ajay Gautam Vs. Delhi Waqf Board and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2014
$~40 to 42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI40 W.P.(C) 7869/2014, CMs No.16461/2014 (for stay), 18462/2014 (for appointment of receiver), 18673/2014 (for ex-parte stay) & 18674/2014 (for intervention) SUHAIL AHMED KHAN Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. D.P. Singh, Ms. Sonam Gupta, Mr. Rajkiran Vats, Mr. R.P. Vyas, Mr. Salil Bhattacharya and Mr. Paruesh Khanna, Advs. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG with Mr. Sanjeev Narula, Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj, Mr. Sunil Dalal and Mr. Ajay Kalra, Advs. for R-1/UOI. Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Adv. for R-3&7. Mr. Waheeh Shafiq and Mohd. Qaseem, Advs. for Delhi Wakf Board with Mr. Rana Parveen Siddique, Member of DWB. Mr. Laliet Kumar, Adv. for R-5. Mr. Arjun Pant, Adv. for R-6/DDA. Mr. R.V. Sinha, Adv. for R-9/CBI. Dr. Saif Mahmood and Mr. Abhijat, Advs. for Intervener in CMs No.18673/2014 & 18674/2014. AND41 W.P.(C) 7976/2014 & CM No.18696/2014 (for stay) AJAY GAUTAM Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Ashish Mohan and Mr....
Suhail Ahmed Khan Vs. Union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2014
$~40 to 42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI40 W.P.(C) 7869/2014, CMs No.16461/2014 (for stay), 18462/2014 (for appointment of receiver), 18673/2014 (for ex-parte stay) & 18674/2014 (for intervention) SUHAIL AHMED KHAN Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. D.P. Singh, Ms. Sonam Gupta, Mr. Rajkiran Vats, Mr. R.P. Vyas, Mr. Salil Bhattacharya and Mr. Paruesh Khanna, Advs. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG with Mr. Sanjeev Narula, Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj, Mr. Sunil Dalal and Mr. Ajay Kalra, Advs. for R-1/UOI. Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Adv. for R-3&7. Mr. Waheeh Shafiq and Mohd. Qaseem, Advs. for Delhi Wakf Board with Mr. Rana Parveen Siddique, Member of DWB. Mr. Laliet Kumar, Adv. for R-5. Mr. Arjun Pant, Adv. for R-6/DDA. Mr. R.V. Sinha, Adv. for R-9/CBI. Dr. Saif Mahmood and Mr. Abhijat, Advs. for Intervener in CMs No.18673/2014 & 18674/2014. AND41 W.P.(C) 7976/2014 & CM No.18696/2014 (for stay) AJAY GAUTAM Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Ashish Mohan and Mr....
Sunil Sikri Vs. the Management Committee of Guru Harkrishan Public
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 7744/2014 and CM APPL. 18228-18229/2014 Decided on :20. 11.2014 IN THE MATTER OF: SUNIL SIKRI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. T.N. Tripathi, Advocate versus THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF GURU HARKRISHAN PUBLIC SCHOOL & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. A.P.S. Ahluwalia, Sr. Advocate with Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate for R-1 and R-2/School. Mr. Sumit Chander, Advocate for R-3/GNCTD. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for quashing/setting aside the orders dated 28.03.2014 and 10.09.2014 passed by the respondent No.1/School and the Memorandum and Articles of Charge dated 17.12.2013 issued by the respondent No.2/Disciplinary Committee of the respondent No.1/School. The petitioner also seeks orders to restrain the respondent No.2/School and respondent No.3/DOE from continuing with the enquiry against him, on the basis of the Resolution dated 21.1...
M/S United Metal Store Vs. Sh. Ashok Khanna(Since Deceased) Through Lr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RC.REV.No.187/2013 & C.M.No.7797/2013 (Stay) 20th November, 2014 % M/S UNITED METAL STORE Through: ......Petitioner Mr.Anurag Mangal, Advocate. VERSUS SH. ASHOK KHANNA(SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LRS ...... Respondent Through: Mr.Sandeep Khurana, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This rent control revision petition is filed under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) impugning the judgment of the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) dated 28.1.2013 by which the ARC has rejected the leave to defend application filed by the petitioner/tenant and has decreed the bonafide necessity eviction petition filed under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act by the respondent/landlord with respect to the suit/tenanted premises being one room/shop on the ground floor forming part of property bearing no.4708/VII, admeasuring 50 sq. yds. situ...
Vijay Kumar Vs. State of the Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2014
$~16. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1715/2012 Date of Decision:20th November, 2013 % VIJAY KUMAR Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.S.B. Dandapani, Adv. versus STATE OF THE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Dayan Krishnan and Ms.Manvi Priya, Advs. for the State. SI Ashish S. Dalal, P.S. Kapashera. G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. With the consent of counsel for the parties the present writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal. The necessary facts to be noticed and as stated in the writ petition are that the petitioner stands convicted by a judgment and order on sentence dated 18.8.2003. The petitioner is serving the sentence awarded and has served more than 11 years out of total sentence of life imprisonment. The petitioner has raised a plea of being a juvenile on the date of commission of the offence i.e. 6.10.2001. According to the petitioner, on the date of incident he was 16 year old. In support of his plea of juvenility the petitioner has filed ...
Chandgi Decd. Thru Lrs Vs. Uoi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 20, 2014 (i) + LA.APP. 34/2006 JAGE RAM Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Rajesh Yadav, Advocate versus UOI & ANR. Through: (ii) + ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Advocate for respondent No.1-UOI Ms. Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for respondent No.2-DDA LA.APP.35-54/2006 CHANDGI DECD. THR. LRS .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rajesh Yadav, Advocate versus UOI & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Advocate for respondent No.1-UOI Ms. Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for respondent No.2-DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Learned counsel for appellants submits the above captioned two LA.APP No.34/2006 LA.APP No.35-54/2006 Page 1 appeals are preferred by the two brothers and the findings returned in the impugned judgments are identical and therefore, these appeals can be heard together. Accordingly, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. T...
Scholastic India Private Limited Vs. Gurgaon Packaging Private Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2014
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CO.PET. 54/2014 & CA No.167/2014 SCHOLASTIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Sacchin Puri with Mr. Vishesh Issar, Advocates. versus GURGAON PACKAGING PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Ms. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajesh Sharma, Mr. Ravi Data, Mr. Aman Bhalla and Mr. Siddharth Chopra, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER % 20.11.2014 SANJEEV SACHDEVA J.(ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner contending that the respondent has failed to pay the admitted dues of Rs.80,00,000/- to the petitioner.2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was a tenant in the property under the respondent. The tenancy was created by a registered lease deed dated 04.04.2012. The possession of the premises was handed over by the respondent to the petitioner on 04.04.2012 for the purpose of fitment etc. and the monthly rent Co. Pet. 54/2014 1 was to commence w.e.f. 01.06....
Vikas Shukla Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELH Reserved on: October 16, 2014 Pronounced on: November 20, 2014 + Crl.M.C. No.2455/12 & Crl.M.A.No.8318/2014 ANKUR CHAWLA Through: .....Petitioner Mr.Kapil Sibal, Sr.Advocate, with Mr. Amit Mahajan, Mr.Amit Sharma, Ms.Kalyani Lal, Mr.Bhanoo Sood, Mr.Karan Kumar Gogna & Mr.Yogesh Kumar Dahiya, Advs. versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS. ....Respondents Through: Mr.R.V.Sinha, Standing Counsel for CBI & Mr.Satyendera Kumar, Advocate Crl. Rev.P.385/2012 & Crl.M.A.No.8308/2014 VIKAS SHUKLA Through: .....Petitioner Mr.N.Hariharan Sr.Advocate, with Mr.Puneet Mittal, Adv. versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS. ....Respondents Through: Mr.R.V.Sinha, Standing Counsel for CBI & Mr.Satyendera Kumar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % 1. JUDGMENT In the above captioned two petitions, the challenge is to common impugned order of 22nd May, 2012 vide which petitioners have been Crl.M.C.No.2455/2014 & Crl.Rev. P.No.385/2012 Page 1 cal...
- ‹ Prev
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- Next ›
- Last »