Delhi Court December 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.
Atul Berry and Anr Vs. Tata Teleservices Ltd and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 289/2014 % Judgement pronounced on:01. 12.2014 ATUL BERRY & ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr B.L. Chawla, Advocate versus TATA TELESERVICES LTD & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr Azmat Amanullah, Advocate for Respondent No.1 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he does not wish to file any rejoinder.2. The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against two respondents, namely, Tata Teleservices Limited and Vion Network Limited.3. It is contended by the petitioner that the petitioners are the owners of built up property No.11747/4, Gali No.5, Khasra No.3624/688, Block U, Basti Reghar, Sat Nagar, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005. A licence agreement dated 31.08.2001 had entered into between the petitioner and respondent No.1 for using the terrace of the said premises for...
Agricultural Produce Market Vs. Ms Hadisa Khatun and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-2014
$~R-4A * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:01.12.2014 MAC.APP. 211/2005 AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET CO. ..... Appellant Through Ms.Avnish Ahlawat and Ms.Latika Chaudhry, Advocates. Versus MS HADISA KHATUN AND ORS. .... Respondents Through Ms.Manjusha Wadhwa and Mr.Arpan Wadhwan, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH,J.(ORAL) 1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant, the owner of the JCB loader which is said to have caused an accident on 23.06.2000. One Sh. Akhtar met with an accident at the outer gate of New Sabji Mandi, Azad Pur, New Delhi. He was said to have been hit by the JCB Loader driven by respondent No.3 said to be driven at a very high speed rashly and negligently.2. Based on the evidence on record, the Tribunal concluded that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.3.3. On compensation a total compensation of Rs.2,96,000/- was awarded. The insurance company, respondent No.4 was direc...
Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd Vs. Rashmi @ Sapana
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-2014
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:01. 12.2014 MAC.APP. 1029/2011 & CM No.20925/2011 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate versus RASHMI @ SAPANA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. J.S. Kanwar, Adv. for R-1 to 4. Mr. Amit Dhalla, Adv. for R-5 & 6. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is filed to impugn the award dated 06.08.2011. The brief facts are that Mr. Aashish @ Rinku on 02.07.2010 was going on his motorcycle. He was hit by a truck driven by Mr. Salim Khan, respondent No.6.2. Based on the evidence on record the Tribunal concluded that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.6. On compensation, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.15,19,816/-, the details of which are as follows:Loss of dependency Rs.14,79,816/- Loss of consortium, Rs.40,000/loss of love and affection, loss of estate and funeral expenses Total 3. Learn...
Sujjan Singh Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:01. 12.2014 + W.P.(C) 4751/2014 SUJJAN SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Narender Sharma, Adv. along with petition in person. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vivek Goyal, CGSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(Oral) Laws control the lesser man. Right conduct controls the greater one. Mark Twain 1. On the last date, of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner took a passover in the matter to ascertain from the petitioner about the duration of the PG Diploma Course which was undertaken by him and after taking a passover, no one had appeared for the petitioner and the matter was adjourned to this date. Today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions from the petitioner who is present in Court, submits that the petitioner had a PG diploma in Orthopaedics from the Vydehi Institute of Medical Sciences, Bangal...
Kanhiya Lal Yadav Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 25, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 01, 2014 % + CRL. A. 1168/2010 KANHIYA LAL YADAV Represented by: .... Appellant Mr.Vibhakar Mishra, Advocate. versus STATE Represented by: .... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Jaipal Singh, PS Mayur Vihar, Delhi. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Kanhiya Lal is convicted for the murder of Miraz vide impugned judgment dated August 09, 2010 and directed to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of `2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of two months which he assails in the present appeal.2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the prosecution has planted the witnesses to foist a false case against the appellant. The evidence of PW-4 Prashant Aggarwal, PW-16 Gurpreet Singh and PW-18 Inspector Surender Singh is contradi...
Hardeep Singh Vs. Baldev Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:04. 02.2014 Date of Decision:01. 12.2014 + CM (M) No.476 of 2013 And CM Nos.7181 of 2013 & 7182 of 2013 HARDEEP SINGH ...... Petitioner Through: Mr. K.R. Pamei, Adv. versus BALDEV SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mahesh Kumar Gautam, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.1. This petition impugns an order dated 21.12.2012 of the learned ADJ, Tis Hazari Courts in Suit No.434/2012 whereby the plaint was returned to the plaintiff/petitioner under Order VII, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) to be filed before the Court of appropriate jurisdiction. The Court was of the view that the valuation report of the suit property as on 10.9.2012 showed it to be of the value of Rs.40,73,500/-, which was more than its pecuniary jurisdiction where the suit was filed. In these circumstances, the plaint was returned.2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on t...
Dew Drops Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-2014
$~ 10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:01. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 4621/2014 & CM91942014 DEW DROPS PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Sumit Bansal with Mr Ateev Mathur and Ms Richa Oberoi For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain, Mr Siddharth Panda, Ms Jyoti Tyagi for LAC. Mr Pawan Mathur, Adv. for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition the petitioner is seeking 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. The petitioner, consequently, seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) and ...
Indian Airlines Vs. Angelique International Limited and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-2014
$~R-101 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA5692005 Reserved on 21st November, 2014 Delivered on 1st December, 2014 INDIAN AIRLINES Through ..... Appellant : Mr. Amit K. Pateria, Adv. Versus ANGELIQUE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED & ANR..... Through : None ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.1. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant has canvassed that wrong delivery of goods will fall within the ambit and scope of Clause 18 of the Carriage by Air Act, 1972 (the Act, for short), thus, suit for recovery of `6,46,800/- filed by the respondent No.1 against appellant was barred by time, having been filed after two years of loss of goods, in view of Rule 29 of the first Schedule and Rule 30 of the second Schedule to the Act.2. By placing reliance on M/s. Vij Sales Corporation vs. Lufthansa Airlines, 1981 2 ILR (Del) 749, which was later on followed in Old Village Ind. Vs. British Airways 1991 RLR443 trial court, in the context of...
Mohd. Atiullah Ansari Vs. M/S. Delhi Institute of Tool Engeneering (Fo ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-2014
$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:1. t December, 2014 + W.P.(C) 8446/2014 MOHD. ATIULLAH ANSARI ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Pratik Batta and Mr. Akarsh Bhalla, Advs. versus M/S. DELHI INSTITUTE OF TOOL ENGENEERING (FORMERLY KNOWN AS TOOL ROOM AND TRAINING CENTRE) ..... Respondent Represented by: NEMO. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM. No.19507/2014 and 19508/2014 (for exemptions) Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the applications are allowed. + W.P.(C) 8446/2014 1. Vide the present petition, petitioner workman has assailed the award and order dated 22.11.2013, whereby the industrial disputes raised by the petitioner has been dismissed by the Ld. Labour Court.2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner had been working with the respondent Management since 21.07.1984. He made a complaint to General Manager of the respondent on 31.03.1986 for unjust and discriminatory action and ano...
Ashok Kumar JaIn Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-2014
19 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:01. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 6427/2014 & CM154292014 ASHOK KUMAR JAIN ..Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner For the Respondents : Mr Dinesh Garg and Mr Vinod Thakur, Advocates : Mr Jaswinder Singh, Advocate with Mr Roshan Lal Goel and Mr Kavindra Gill, Advocaes for R-1 & R-2 Mr Pawan Mathur, Advocate for R-3 Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for R-4 & R-5 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The learned counsel for the DDA (respondent No.3) states that the counter affidavit shall be filed in the course of the day. He has handed over a copy of the said affidavit which is taken on record.2. 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 re...
- ‹ Prev
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 108
- 109
- Next ›
- Last »