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.
Ravindra Kumar Verma Vs. M/S. Bptp Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.M.(M) No.1021/2014 18th November, 2014 % RAVINDRA KUMAR VERMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Advocate. Versus M/S. BPTP LTD. & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Harish Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. No.18930/2014 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. + C.M.(M) No.1021/2014 and C.M. No.18931/2014 (stay) 2. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the plaintiff in the suit seeking setting aside of the impugned order dated 31.7.2014 by which trial court has allowed the application filed by the defendant/respondent no.1 under Section 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and held that the suit proceedings could not be continued in view of the arbitration clause between the parties i.e parties were to re...
Ms. Gita Singh Vs. Smt. Prem Lata Meena and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.M.(M) No.1020/2014 18th November, 2014 % MS. GITA SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. Versus SMT. PREM LATA MEENA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. No.18924/2014 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. + C.M.(M) No.1020/2014 2. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the judgment of the trial court dated 28.7.2014 by which the trial court has allowed the leave to defend application in a suit for recovery filed by the petitioner/plaintiff.3. I have asked the counsel for the petitioner to show me any para in the plaint averring as to how the suit is to be filed under Order XXXVII of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), and to which query counsel for the petitioner had no option but to concede that in the plaint no averment is made as ...
Mahesh Chand Vs. Sumnesh Kumar Chaturvedi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.455/2014 18th November , 2014 % MAHESH CHAND Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Krishan Kumar and Mr. Deepak Vohra, Advocate. VERSUS SUMNESH KUMAR CHATURVEDI ...... Respondent Through: Mr. N.S.Negi, 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 trial court dated 22.2.2014 by which the trial court has dismissed the suit on the ground that the suit is barred under Order IX Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).2. The subject suit is a suit for recovery of possession of flat no.2077, DDA Janta Flats, GTB Enclave, Delhi-110093. Petitioner-plaintiff purchased the suit property from one Smt. Devki; who was the mother of the defendant; through registered documents dated 10.2.2006 being agreement to sell, power of attorney, Will etc. The case of the respondent-defendant ...
Ram Mohan Gupta and anr. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2014
$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3550/2014 & CRL.M.A. No.12250/2014 RAM MOHAN GUPTA & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Abhik Kumar, Advocate versus STATE & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. O.P. Saxena, APP for State Mr. Deepak Gandhi, Adv. for R-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition has been filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.67/2012 registered at Police Station Connaught Place under Sections 409/420/120B IPC, and the proceedings emanating therefrom, allegedly on the ground that the matter has been settled.2. It is stated that the aforesaid FIR came to be lodged at the instance of the complainant alleging defalcation of approximately Rs. 64 Lacs in the matter of handling certain shares that were entrusted to the petitioner No.1, who is the Managing Director of Unicon Securities Pvt. Ltd., which is stated to be a company dealing with the trading of shares on behalf of vario...
Pritosh Sharma and ors Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2014
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5203/2014 PRITOSH SHARMA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. J.S. Rawat & Ms. Vibha Rawat, Advocates with petitioners in person versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State with SI Sanjay Jain, PS Malviya Ngr Ms. Ritu Negi, Mr. B. Mishra, Advocate for R-2 with R-2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) 1. This petition has been moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.263/2012 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at Police Station Malviya Nagar on 05.06.2013 on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties.2. Issue notice.3. Counsel for the State, as well as for the second respondent/complainant, enter appearance and accept notice. The Investigating Officer, Sub-Inspector Sanjay Jain, Police Station Malviya Nagar, who is also present in Court, identifies the pe...
Director of Income Tax (Exemption) Vs. M/S Indraprastha Cancer Society
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI INCOME TAX APPEAL No.240/2014 Reserved on:28. h October, 2014 Date of Decision:18th November, 2014 % DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) ..... Appellant Through Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel. Versus M/S INDRAPRASTHA CANCER SOCIETY ..... Respondent Through Ms. Shashi M. Kapila, Mr. R.R. Maurya and Mr. Pravesh Sharma, Advocates. INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS. 348/2014, 463/2014, 464/2014 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) ..... Appellant Through Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel. Versus M/S SANSKRITI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY Through Nemo. ..... Respondent INCOME TAX APPEAL No.406/2014 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) ..... Appellant Through Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel. Versus M/S ABUL KALAM AZAD ISLAMIC AWAKENING Respondent Through Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.: This common order, in relation to the aforesaid appeals, is on the point of admission. It is noti...
Lalit Balhara and ors Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 949/2012 LALIT BALHARA & ORS ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Sanjay Suri, Advocate versus STATE Through : ..... Respondent Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP for State along with SI Ajmer Singh, STF/Crime Branch. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA % ORDER1811.2014 CRL. M.B. 10102/2014(suspension of sentence) 1. This is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail during the pendency of the appeal moved on behalf of the appellant/applicant - Ms. Preeti Balhara. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has two minor children, a daughter Lavnika aged about 16 years and a son Tushar aged about 10 years. Due to incarceration of the applicant as well as her husband in jail, the children have become destitute. Their studies have affected adversely. Daughter Lavnika is in Class XII and now both the children are not attending the school.2. Reliance was place...
Chanderlekha Solomon Vs. Govt of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2014
$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:18. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 4422/2014 CHANDERLEKHA SOLOMON .... Petitioner versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr B.S. Maan and Mr Vishal Maan, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for R-1 & R-2 Mr Arjun Pant, Advocate for R-3 CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding, which is the subject matter of the present writ petition, ought to be deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.2. The Award under the La...
M/S National Heart Institute and anr. Vs. Government of National Capit ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on: November 18, 2014 W.P.(C) 7779/2013& CM No.16548/2013 (for stay) M/S NATIONAL HEART INSTITUTE & ANR. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.Satyakam, Advocate with Mr. S.K. Shailly, General Manager ( F & L) of the Petitioners. Versus GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI (LOBOUR) AND ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Dheeraj Kaushik for Ms. Raavi Birbal, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.W.P.(C) No.7779/2013 1. The present petition is directed against the order dated 06.09.2013, whereby the Learned Tribunal dismissed the application filed by the petitioners under Section 151 CPC.2. Brief facts of the case are that vide order dated 01.04.2010 services of the respondent No.2/workman was terminated after holding a departmental enquiry. Vide order dated 11.11.2009, Under Secretary (Labour) referred the following question to the Labour Court for adjudica...
Pawan Mathur and ors Vs. Delhi Development Authority and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2014
$~53 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:18. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 5171/2014 & CM No.10295/2014 PAWAN MATHUR & ORS .... Petitioners versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Mr Raj Kumar Sharma, Advocate with Mr Ajayinder Sangwan, Mr Tarunesh Kumar and Mr Rohan Sharma, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr Dhanesh Relan, Advocate with Mr Arush Bhandari, Advocate for R-1 Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for R-2 & R-3 CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioners seek the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisitio...
- ‹ Prev
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- Next ›
- Last »