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.
Jagpal Singh Chaney Vs. Cbi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 17, 2014 + CRL.A. 780/2013 JAGPAL SINGH CHANEY Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ramesh Gupta, senior advocate with Mr. Manav Gupta, Advs. versus CBI Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, Standing Counsel for CBI CRL.A. 883/2013 JAGPAL SINGH CHANEY Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ramesh Gupta, senior advocate with Mr. Manav Gupta, Advs. versus CBI Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, Standing Counsel for CBI CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA ORDER : SUNITA GUPTA, J.Crl. MB102732014 in Crl. A. 780/2013 & Crl. MB102742014 in Crl. A. 883/2013 1. By virtue of these applications, the appellant Jagpal Singh Chaney seeks suspension of sentence and release on bail during pendency of appeals.2. It is submitted by Mr. Ramesh Gupta, learned senior counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been convicted for offences under Section 120B read with Section 420/ 467/468/471 of Indian Penal Code read with ...
M/S Ess Cee Cee and Associates (India) Pvt Ltd Vs. Government of Nct o ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: November 17, 2014 + W.P.(C) 7726/2014 M/S ESS CEE CEE & ASSOCIATES (INDIA) PVT LTD... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Anil Sapra Sr. Adv. with Mr.Sanjeet Singh, Mr.Mridul Yadav, Mr. Akshay Sapra, Advs. Versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Parvinder Chauhan, Adv. for R-2 Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv. for R-4. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) C.M.No.18165/2014 (Exemption) Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is allowed. W.P.(C) 7726/2014 & CM No.18164/2014 (Stay) 1. Vide instant petition the petitioner prays for setting aside the order dated 28.10.2014 passed by respondent No.2/Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board.2. Mr.Parvinder Chauhan, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 on advance notice submits that in the perpetual lease deed dated 05.09.1985 in Clause VI it is stated that in the event of any disp...
Union of India Vs. Suraj Bhan and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 17, 2014 + LA.APP. 313/2014 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Siddharth Panda, Advocate versus SURAJ BHAN & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Kunal Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.3-DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT ORAL % C.M. No.11827/2014 (u/S151CPC) There is delay of 248 days in re-filing the accompanying appeal. For reasons stated in the application, it is allowed and delay is condoned. Application is disposed of. C.M. No.11825/2014 (u/O41R3 CPC & Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act) There is delay of 70 days in filing the accompanying appeal. The reasons for the delay occasioned as put-forth in paragraphs No.3 & 4 of the instant application are nothing but bureaucratic lethargy in filing the accompanying appeal. Applying the parameters governing condonation of delay, as LA.APP No.313/2014 Page 1 reiterated by the Apex Court in Esha Bhattacharjee Vs. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 S...
Smt. Vidya Dhek and ors. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO3602014 Decided on 17th November, 2014 SMT. VIDYA DHEK & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Ms. Aruna Mehta, Adv. Versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.(ORAL) CM No.18893/2014 For the reasons explained in the application delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Application is disposed of. CM No.18892/2014 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. FAO3602014 1. Appellant no.1 is widow; whereas appellant nos. 2 and 3 are children of Late Shri Kailash Singh Dhek. They filed a claim petition before the Railway Claim Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi seeking compensation of `4 lacs in respect of death of Shri Kailash Singh Dhek, in an alleged untoward incident dated 20th January, 2008, relating to a train. In the claim petition, it was stated that deceased was working in a firm in Gurgaon. The said firm was having an office at Okhla Industrial Area as...
Ran Singh Kohar Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision:17. 11.2014 % W.P. (C) 7885/2014 C.M. Nos.18485-18486/2014 RAN SINGH KOHAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sachin Chauhan, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Anil Soni, CGSC on behalf of Union of India with Mr. Naginder Benipal, Advocate. Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani, Addl. Standing Counsel for Govt. of NCT of Delhi with Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. Issue notice. Mr. Anil Soni, CGSC accepts notice on behalf of Union of India. With consent of counsel, the matter heard finally.2. The petitioner assails the order dated 08.09.2014 passed in O.A. No.2457/2013 by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT/ Tribunal) in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Tribunal dismissed the petitioners original application by the impugned order.3. The petitioner was appointed as a Su...
Radhey Shyam Vs. Punjab and Sind Bank and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
$~18. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.7854/2014 Date of decision:17. h November, 2014 RADHEY SHYAM ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjay Jain & Mr. Ashok Jain, Advocates. versus PUNJAB & SIND BANK & ORS. Through Nemo. ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): The challenge is to the order dated 20th August, 2014 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT, for short) affirming the finding recorded by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT, for short) in OA No.15/2005 and SA No.40/2008 vide order dated 22nd April, 2013.2. Punjab and Sind Bank had initiated recovery proceedings in OA No.15/2005 before the DRT against M/s Leather Makers, sole proprietorship of one Arvind Kumar, Seema wife of Arvind Kumar as a guarantor and the petitioner herein-Radhey Shyam. Radhey Shyam, it was asserted had created an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deed of property No.681, Pocket-II,...
Union of India and ors. Vs. Satpal Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision:17. 11.2014 % W.P. (C) 5686/2014 C.M. Nos.14056-14057/2014 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. R.V. Sinha, Mr. R.N. Singh and Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocates versus SATPAL Through: ..... Respondent Mr. K.R. Chawla, Advocate AND % W.P.(C) 5762/2014 C.M. Nos.14205-14206/2014 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. R.V. Sinha, Mr. R.N. Singh and Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocates versus SATPAL SINGH Through: ..... Respondent Mr. K.R. Chawla, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. With the consent of the parties, both the petitions have been heard together. The respondent/applicant had challenged his order of transfer before the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereafter referred to as the CAT) and sought appropriate directions from the Central Government.2. By the order dated 22nd November, 2013, which is impugned in the present wri...
Mohan Lal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 11, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: November 17, 2014 % + CRL.A. 297/2014 VICKY Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.R.S.Malik, Advocate with Mr.Puneet Mahendru and Mr.Sahil Malik, Advocates versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP CRL.A. 299/2014 MOHAN LAL Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.R.S.Malik, Advocate with Mr.Puneet Mahendru and Mr.Sahil Malik, Advocates versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP CRL.A. 1303/2014 STATE Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for versus BUNTY @ RAJIV & ANR Represented by: CRL.A.No.297/2014 & conn.matters ..... Respondents Mr.R.S.Malik, Advocate with Mr.Puneet Mahendru and Mr.Sahil CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARDEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PARDEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Appellants Mohan Lal and his son Vicky do not dispute that an incident took place at around 10:30 PM on July 30, 2011 involving the...
Bhupinder Kumar and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:31. 07.2014 Pronounced on:17. 11.2014 + W.P.(C) 7371/2010, C.M. NO.6771/2014 BHUPINDER KUMAR AND ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Sh. Tarun Sharma and Ms. Boudh Prabha, Advocates. Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Sh. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Sh. Vikram Jetly, Sh. Ruchir Mishra and Sh. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocates, for UOI. Sh. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate, for UPSC. Sh. G.D. Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Piyush Sharma, Advocates, for Resp. No.7. Sh. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Supriya Juneja and Sh. Viraj Gandhi, Advocates, for Resp. Nos. 8 and 10. Respondent No.4 in person. Sh. Darpan Wadhwa, Sh. Arun Khatri and Ms. Roshni Namboodiry, Advocates, for Sh. D.S. Shukla/applicant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % For detailed judgment, the decision dated 17.11.2014 in W.P.(C) 7370/2010 may be referred to. S. RAVINDRA BHAT (JUDGE) VIPI...
Sh.Bijender Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 17, 2014 + LA.APP. 269/2014 SH.BIJENDER SINGH & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. S.K.Solanki, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Advocate for respondent No.1-UOI Mr. Kunal Sharma, Advocate for respondent No2-DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT ORAL % C.M. No.18886/2014 (u/O41R3CPC r/w Section 5 of the Limitation Act) There is delay of 3 years in filing the accompanying appeal. The acquisition of land in question pertains to village Bijwasan, Delhi, which was acquired vide Notification of 13th December, 2000, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Enhancement of compensation is claimed while relying upon Apex Courts decision in S.L.P. No.18883/2012, Impulse India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Anr., rendered on 13th February, 2014. Upon notice of this application, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for first respondent submits tha...
- ‹ Prev
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- Next ›
- Last »