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.
Ram Kumar Yadav and ors Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2014
$~37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5244/2014 RAM KUMAR YADAV & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Surya Nath Pandey, Advocate with petitioners in person. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with SI Hasrat Ali, CAW Cell. R-2 in preson. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. No.17926/2014 (for exemption) Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed off. CRL.M.C. 5244/2014 1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.421/2013 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at Police Station Ghazipur on 8th October, 2013 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 compla...
icici Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Krishna Rani Khera and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2014
$~A-7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:19.11.2014 + MAC.APP. 816/2011 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD..... Appellant Through Ms.Suman Bagga, Advocate. versus KRISHNA RANI KHERA & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr.S.K.Vashisth, Advocate for R-1. Mr.Yogesh K.Chandna, Advocate for R2&3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) CM No.142/2014 (for restoration) For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The appeal is restored to its original position. MAC.APP. 816/2011 1. By the present appeal the appellant seeks recovery rights from the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle, namely, respondents No.2 and 3.2. The brief facts which led to filing of the claim petition and thereafter the present appeal are that respondent No.1 was returning home from a temple at Uttam Nagar on 22.02.2010. While crossing the road at Sanatan Dharam Mandir Gate, Uttam Nagar, she was hit by a speeding scooter coming from behind said to...
Mohd Shamsheed @ Shamsheer Vs. the State Govt of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2014
$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5238/2014 MOHD SHAMSHEED @ SHAMSHEER ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Bajaj, Advocate versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS..... Respondents Through: Ms. Nishi Jain, APP for State with SI Ajay Kumar, PS Dabri Mr. Sarbesh Wardha, Adv. for R-2-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA ORDER % 19.11.2014 1. This petition has been moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of FIR No.827/2005 registered under Section 304A IPC at Police Station Dabri on 28.11.2005 on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties.2. Issue notice.3. Counsel for the State, as well as counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, enter appearance and accept notice. Both the complainants, Ram Kumar and Smt. Urmila, are present in person. The Investigating Officer, Sub-Inspector Ajay Kumar, Police Station Dabri, also identifies the complainants.4. It is stated that the aforesaid FIR came to b...
Tara Kochhar Batra Vs. Asstt. Collector and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2014
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on 19th November, 2014. + W.P.(C) 3708/2012 TARA KOCHHAR BATRA Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Gulshan Chawla with Ms. Prity, Advs. versus ASSTT. COLLECTOR & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Rajat Sharma, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J (ORAL) 1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the recovery order dated 25.05.2012 issued by Assistant Collector and order dated 02.05.2012 passed by respondent No.2/Deputy Labour Commissioner.2. Pursuance to order dated 22.08.2014, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner/Establishment is ready to take the respondent/workmen in service and the period for which they remained out of service shall be counted in service, however, without wages.3. Initially, 43 workmen raised the industrial dispute out of which 21 workmen have already settled their dispute with the petitioner. The couns...
Rajkumar Dyeing and Printing Works Private Limited and Vs. Competition ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:19. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 5947/2014 & CM145382014 RAJKUMAR DYEING & PRINTING WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. ..... Petitioners versus COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ANR. .... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Mr Rakesh Sinha and Mr Pradeep Gupta. For the Respondents : MrVaibhav Gaggar, Mr Abhimanyu Chopra, Ms Reena kumara and Mr Naveen Kumar for R-1. Mr AnujAggarwal, Mr Niti Jain and Mr Gaurav Khanna for R2. AND + W.P.(C) 6260/2014 & CM151462014 M/S R S INDUSTRIES ..... Petitioner versus COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ANR. .... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Rana S. Biswas and Mr Sunil Sharma. For the Respondents : Mr Vaibhav Gaggar, Mr Abhimanyu Chopra, Ms Reena Kumari and Mr Naveen Kumar for R-1. Mr Vineet Malhotra for R-2. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 These petitions call into question the penalties imposed by th...
Ashwani Kumar Bajaj and anr. Vs. Kaushal Pahuja
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 19, 2014 + RSA2532014 & CM No.15679/2014 ASHWANI KUMAR BAJAJ & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr.Ramashankar, Ms.Sobha Gupta & Mr.Shivom Garg, Advocates versus KAUSHAL PAHUJA Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Neeraj Kumar Singh, Advocate for Mr.Kaushal Pahuja, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Respondent-plaintiffs suit for possession, recovery of damages and mesne profits stands decreed by the trial court on an application under Order XII Rule 6 of CPC, as landlord and tenant relationship between the parties is not disputed. Vide common impugned order, trial court has also dismissed appellant-defendants application under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC whereby bar of Section 50 of The Delhi Rent Control Act was raised. The First Appellate Court, vide impugned judgment of 22nd August, 2014 has affirmed trial courts judgment while noting that the suit property falls in Khasra No.85/1 of Village Hasts...
Alka Tyagi Vs. Bijender Singh and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2014
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:19. h November, 2014 % + CS(OS) 2098/2014 ALKA TYAGI Through: .... Plaintiff Dr. Suman Chaudhary, Advocate versus BIJENDER SINGH & ORS Through: None ..... Defendants CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for specific performance and permanent injunction under Sections 10 and 34 of Specific Relief Act with respect to land comprising in Khasra No.15//3(4-5), 4(2-18), 5(2-1), 26 (0-3), 1(112), situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Devrala, Delhi.2. Summons in the suit and notice in the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2, were issued on 21.07.2014. Despite service none appeared for the defendants, consequently the defendants were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 22.08.2014. Time was granted to the plaintiff to file affidavits by way of evidence.3. Plaintiff has filed her affidavit by way of evidence and same has been exhibited as Ex.PW1/A. PW1 has d...
Santosh Rani Vs. Sita Ram
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 19, 2014 + RSA3152014 & CM No.17909/2014 SANTOSH RANI Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Rajeev Verma, Advocate versus SITA RAM ..... Respondent Through: Nemo CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % The concurrent findings returned by the courts below are that the appellant-plaintiff has failed to prove the Agreement to Sell of 16th January, 2001, whose specific performance was sought by the appellant. The factual narration of this case already finds mention in the opening paragraphs of impugned judgment and needs no reiteration. All that is required to be noticed is that the purported sale consideration of the suit property was paid by way of cash. Admittedly, a friendly loan of `45,000/- was taken by respondent from appellant while mortgaging the suit property and respondent-defendant had failed to repay the said loan amount. The purported sale consideration of the suit property was RSA No.315/2014 Page 1 ...
Sh. Karanveer Singh Vs. Sh. Dharamveer Singh and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2014
$~2 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CM(M) 604/2013 19th November, 2014 % SH. KARANVEER SINGH Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. Sandeep Agarwal, Adv. with Mr.M.K. Singh, Adv. versus SH. DHARAMVEER SINGH & ORS ..... Respondent Through : Dr. L.S. Chaudhary, Adv. with Mr.Ajay Chaudhary, Adv. 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 is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff impugning the order of the trial court dated 6 th May, 2013 by which the trial court has rejected an application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (hereinafter referred as to the Act) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) to lead additional evidence and also for cross examining the witness of the other side.2. Paras 2 and 4 of the impugned judgment are relevant and the same read as under:2 Ld. counsel for the plaintiff s...
Baljit Singh Dahiya Vs. B.S.E.S.Rajdhani Power Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + s W.P.(C) 672/2014 Decided on IN THE MATTER OF: BALJIT SINGH DAHIYA :19. 11.2014 ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Vimal Wadhawan, Advocate with petitioner in person versus B.S.E.S.RAJDHANI POWER LTD. & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. S.N.Choudhri, Ms.Shruti Choudhri & Mr.Varun Rajpal, Advocates for R-1 Ms.Meenakshi Midha and Mr.Siddhartha Nagpal, Advocates for R-2 CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition praying inter alia for issuance of directions to the respondent No.1/BSES RPL to fix his salary on the basic pay, equivalent to one Mr.D.K.Sharma, w.e.f. 1.1.1994, with all the consequential benefits.2. A counter affidavit was filed by the respondent No.1/BSES RPL wherein, it was averred that the present petition is a gross abuse of the process of law inasmuch as the petitioner who had availed of SVRS on 31.12.2003, has concealed material facts from the court. Learned counsel f...
- ‹ Prev
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- Next ›
- Last »