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.
M/S Boston Beverages Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Ramesh Babu Sadhu
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:10. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:19. hDecember, 2014 % + CRL. M.C. 4380/2014 M/S BOSTON BEVERAGES PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Wadhwa, Advocate versus M/S KINGSTON BEVERAGES & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr.V. Sridhar Reddy, Advocate + CRL. M.C. 4381/2014 M/S BOSTON BEVERAGES PVT.LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Wadhwa, Advocate versus RAMESH BABU SADHU Through: .....Respondent Mr. V. Sridhar Reddy, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH JUDGMENT1 By was of these petitions filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), the petitioner assails orders dated 06.09.2014 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act), Central-01, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (in Crl. M.C. No.4380/2014) and order dated 08.09.2014 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate-03, Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (in Crl. M.C. No.4381/2014), whereby the complaint(...
Staff Selection Commission and Anr. Vs. Sudesh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
$~20. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:19. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 9055/2014 and C.M. Nos.20669-670/2014 STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ANR. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. S.M. Arif, Advocate. versus SUDESH ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Sachin Chauhan, Mr.Sameer Sharma &Mr. Amandeep Joshi, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioner Staff Selection Commission (SSC) has preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail the common order dated 30.07.2014 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT/ Tribunal), inter alia, in O.A. No.930/2014 titled Sudesh Vs. Staff Selection Commission & Others. By the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the aforesaid Original Application preferred by the applicant Sudesh and quashed the second show-cause notice dated 28.01.2014 issued by the petitioner ...
the Oriental Insurancec Co Ltd Vs. Vinod Kumar and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
$~A-64 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:19. 12.2014 + MAC.APP. 1157/2014 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCEC CO LTD ..... Appellant Through Mr.A.K.Soni, Advocate versus VINOD KUMAR & ORS ..... Respondent Through CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. The present appeal is filed seeking to impugn the Award dated 1.10.2014.2. The background facts are that on 1.6.2013 respondent No.1 was sitting in the capacity of a helper with the driver in the cabin in the Canter. The Canter was coming to Delhi from Neemrana. At District Rewari it was hit by a Trailer stated to be driven by its driver at a high speed rashly and negligently in a zigzag manner. Due to the sudden and forcible impact, respondent No.1 sustained grievous injuries on his left leg and other grievous injuries on all parts of his body.3. Based on the evidence on record the Tribunal concluded that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the trailer.4. On...
Vijay Nath Yadav Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:19. 12.2014 + WP (C) No.2450 of 2012 VIJAY NATH YADAV Through: ...... Petitioner Mr. U. Srivastava, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(Oral) 1. In this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of the orders dated 1.3.2012 & 23.3.2012, whereby his candidature for the post of Sub-Inspector in BSF was cancelled and was discharged from service on the ground that he was overage for the said post as on the cut off date of 04.07.2008.2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was a Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF). He joined the Special Protection Group (Cabinet Secretariat) as an SA on deputation from 17.4.2006 and was also extended the benefits of ACP w.e.f. 26.3.2008. While on deputation, he took the exami...
Ashok Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LA.APP. 401/2014 ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.K. Rout and Ms. Dimple Dhamija, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Through: .....Respondents Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Advocate for respondent-UOI Mr. A.S. Rao, Law Officer for respondent-DMRC CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER1912.2014 % C.M.APPL. No.20811/2014 (for condonation of delay) There is delay of 36 days in re-filing the accompanying appeal. Notice. Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Advocate, accepts notice for respondent No.1UOI and Mr. A.S. Rao, Law Officer, accepts notice for respondent No.2DMRC. The reason put forth for the delay occasioned is that the time was consumed in arranging the court fee. The reason put forth provides sufficient cause for the delay occasioned. The application is allowed and the delay is condoned. The application is accordingly disposed of. LA.APP. 401/2014 Page 1 C.M.APPL. No.20810/2014 (for condonation of delay) There is delay of 40 days in filin...
Staff Selection Commission and Anr. Vs. Sudesh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
$~20. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:19. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 9055/2014 and C.M. Nos.20669-670/2014 STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ANR. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. S.M. Arif, Advocate. versus SUDESH ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Sachin Chauhan, Mr.Sameer Sharma &Mr. Amandeep Joshi, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioner Staff Selection Commission (SSC) has preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail the common order dated 30.07.2014 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT/ Tribunal), inter alia, in O.A. No.930/2014 titled Sudesh Vs. Staff Selection Commission & Others. By the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the aforesaid Original Application preferred by the applicant Sudesh and quashed the second show-cause notice dated 28.01.2014 issued by the petitioner ...
Ceeco Technologies Pvt. Ltd Vs. Central Public Works Department and Or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:07. 11.2014 Judgment pronounced on:19. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 1062/2014 & CM No.2189/2014 CEECO TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD ..... Petitioner versus CENTRAL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT & ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr N.N. Aggarwal and Ms Manpreet Kaur, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr Manish Mohan and Mr Gaurav Sharma, Advocates for R-1 & R-2 Mr Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr Manish Mohan, CGSC and Ms Noor Anand, Advocate for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J1 The petitioner herein seeks quashing of impugned order dated 03.02.2014 passed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 whereby the representation made by the petitioner in terms of order dated 22.01.2014 passed by this Court in W.P(C) No.444/2014 has been rejected. The petitioner further seeks a direction compelling respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to reconsider the tender submitte...
Jugal Kishor Ratnu Vs. Mrs. Meena Tevary and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : November 25, 2014 DECIDED ON : December 19, 2014 + CS(OS) 1688/2006 JUGAL KISHOR RATNU ..... Plaintiff Through : Mr.Rajesh Yadav, Advocate with Ms.Ruchira Arora & Mr.Dhananjay Mehlawat, Advocates. versus MRS. MEENA TEVARY & ORS. ..... Defendants Through : Mr.Sanjeev Sindhwani, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Garima Prashad & Mr.Uday Joshi, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.IA No.2912/2014 (u/S154Evidence Act) 1. The plaintiff has instituted the instant suit for possession, prohibitory permanent injunction and mesne profits against the defendants. Issues were settled by an order dated 16.10.2008. 22.11.2013 before the Local Commissioner, On the plaintiff examined Dr.Rajiv Agarwal (PW-5) who proved photocopy of the medical certificate dated 26.12.2005 (Ex.PW-1/5) issued by him. In the crossexamination, Dr.Rajiv Agarwal was confronted with another certificate/document dated 01.08.2006 issued by him. It was exhibited as Ex...
Virender Kumar Gupta Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LA.APP. 404/2014 VIRENDER KUMAR GUPTA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.K. Rout and Ms. Dimple Dhamija, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Through: .....Respondents Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Advocate for respondent-UOI Mr. A.S. Rao, Law Officer for respondent-DMRC CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER1912.2014 % C.M.APPL. No.20838/2014 (for condonation of delay) There is delay of 36 days in re-filing the accompanying appeal. Notice. Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Advocate, accepts notice for respondent No.1UOI and Mr. A.S. Rao, Law Officer, accepts notice for respondent No.2DMRC. The reason put forth for the delay occasioned is that the time was consumed in arranging the court fee. The reason put forth provides sufficient cause for the delay occasioned. The application is allowed and the delay is condoned. The application is accordingly disposed of. LA.APP. 404/2014 Page 1 C.M.APPL. No.20837/2014 (for condonation of delay) There is delay of 37 days in fil...
Vera Ruth Rego Gonsalves Vs. Manider Pal Singh Nee Maninder Pal and Or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:19. h December, 2014 + CS (OS) No.900/ 2010 VERA RUTH REGO GONSALVES Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Surendra Desai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Kumar Garg, Advocate versus MANIDER PAL SINGH NEE MANINDER PAL AND ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Vikas Mahajan, Advocate with Mr. Rohan Gupta, Advocate and Mr. S.S. Rai, Advocate for D-1 and D2 Mr. R.P. Sharma, Advocate for D-3 and D-5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL I.A. No.15449/ 2010 (Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC) in CS (OS) No.900/ 2010 1. This application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed by the Plaintiff/ Applicant for punishing Respondents Ms. Joyce Makhani, Mr. Vinay Chhabra and Mr. Jerry Makhani for violating the status quo order dated 11.05.2010 and for attachment of their property.2. The suit (CS (OS) 900/ 2010) for declaration, pre-emption, permanent injunction, partition and possession was filed by the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »