Delhi Court December 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 92 of about 1,089 results (0.064 seconds)Sai Lok Kalyan Sanstha Through President Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:3. d December, 2014. % + WP(C) No.3252/2014 SAI LOK KALYAN SANSTHA THROUGH PRESIDENT ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Gautam (in-person) Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC /UOI. Ms. Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel for GNCTD. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed as a Public Interest Litigation flags the issue of broadcast of a large number of programmes/advertisements on the television channels based on Astrology, Lal Kitab, Tarot, Numerology, Devi Shakti aur Kripa, by so called self made astrologers, swamiji, panditji, guruji and babaji who promise cures of various ailments on payment of money. Alleging such claims to be not based on any logic and scientific verification and being detrimental to public interest, reliefs of : i. directing the respondents Union...
Tag this Judgment!Shishir Yadav Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5710/2014 SHISHIR YADAV Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.H.S. Dhaiya, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Hashmat Nabi and Mr. Anuj Singh, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI ORDER % 03.12.2014 NAJMI WAZIRI, J (ORAL)1) This petition impugns an order dated 19th November, 2014 whereby the petitioners appointment to the post of Constable/Driver cum Pump Operator in the Central Industrial Security Force (in short CISF) had been cancelled pursuant to the recommendations of the Standing Screening Committee (in short SSC). The petitioners case is that on 7th June, 2013, he was appointed to the post of Constable and was required to report to the CISF Recruits Training Centre at Bhilai Uttai, Distt: Durg, Chhattisgarh. On 6th July, 2013, when he reported for his training, he was not allowed to join the same and was sent back in the context of a criminal case in ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Spearhead Digital Studio Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shri H. K. Mitroo
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CM(M) 1067/2014 3rd December, 2014 % M/S SPEARHEAD DIGITAL STUDIO PVT. LTD. ......Petitioner Through: Mr. Z. Duggal, representative of the petitioner company in person. VERSUS SHRI H. K. MITROO Through: ...... Respondent Mr. P.S. Bindra, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) Caveat No.1073/2014 1. Counsel appears for the caveator and thus the caveat stands discharged. + C.M.(M) No.1067/2014 and C.M. Nos.19879-80/2014 2. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner-company, who is defendant in the suit, impugning the order dated 7.10.2014 by which right of the petitioner/defendant to crossexamine PW-1 was closed. The subsequent paragraphs of this judgment will show that how tenants in Delhi who are occupying the valuable properties, by hook or by crook keep on continuing and dragging the litigation thus causing grave haras...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Hem Raj and Ors. Vs. Sh. Nihal Chand and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.R.P.No.115/2014 & C.M.Nos.12897-12900/2014 03rd December, 2014 % SH. HEM RAJ & ORS. Through: ......Petitioners Mr.B.L.Gupta, Advocate. VERSUS SH. NIHAL CHAND & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a wholly frivolous and a malafide petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) filed by three defendants to a suit for partition, and who do not want to vacate the suit property, although the suit property has been auctioned, auction purchaser has deposited the price and the price has to be equally divided between the parties. Challenge is in fact to the consent order dated 25.3.2014 and therefore in fact this petition against a consent order does not lie.2. By the order dated 30.1.2014, the trial court recorded the aspects that the preliminary decree dated 20.1.2010 has become final after dismissal of the fir...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Harmeet Singh Vs. Smt. Anshu Aggarwal and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.M.(M) No.84 /2014 and C.M.No.1514/2014 (delay) 03rd December, 2014 % SH. HARMEET SINGH ......Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person. VERSUS SMT. ANSHU AGGARWAL & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner appears in person and seeks an adjournment. I refuse to grant adjournment because this is one of the extreme cases of abuse of the process of the law which this Court has seen and which will become clear from the factual details, which I am stating below. Also, this case has already come up on two occasions earlier, yet no notice till date is issued. Therefore, no adjournment as prayed for can be granted as prayed by the petitioner on the ground that his counsel is not well.2. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff impugning the judgment dated 30.03.2013 of t...
Tag this Judgment!Attar Singh Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:3. d December, 2014 + W.P.(C) 2816/2013 ATTAR SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through Dr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Advocate AND + W.P.(C) 3240/2013 JASWANT SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Vikas Mahajan, Central Government Standing Counsel with Mr. S.S. Rai & Ms. Ruchika Mahajan, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI JUDGMENT % KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.1. By these writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek a writ of mandamus to the respondents to grant promotion to the petitioners to the rank of Sub-Inspector alongwith seniority and financial benefits from the date their juniors had been promoted; and (ii) a writ of mandamus to the respondents to grant the same relief as granted v...
Tag this Judgment!Gandharav Saini Vs. Pushpa Sharma and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:09. 05.2014 Date of Decision: _03.12.2014 + Ex.F.A. No.14 of 2009 GANDHARAV SAINI Through: ...... Appellant Mr. Virender K. Singh, Adv. versus PUSHPA SHARMA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. J.K. Sharma & Mr. Mukesh Sharma, Advs. for R-1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.1. In this Execution First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), the appellant impugns the order of the Executing Court dated 14.10.2009 by which the objections filed by respondent No.1 herein, namely Smt. Pushpa Sharma (objector) were allowed and the judgment and decree dated 23.1.2006 was held to be not binding upon her. As a consequence thereof, possession of the suit premises, being Shop No.P-4, Connaught Place, New Delhi (suit premises) was directed to be restored to the objector.2. The appellants case is that Shri V.B. Sharma, the husband of respondent No.1 was a tenant in the suit premises. Upon his demi...
Tag this Judgment!Amarjeet Singh Sachdeva Vs. Ashok Monga
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:25. 02.2014 Date of Decision:03. 12.2014 + CM (M) No.1360 of 2012 & CM No.20876 of 2012 AMARJEET SINGH SACHDEVA ...... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja & Mr. Ishaan Chhaya, Advs. versus ASHOK MONGA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S.K. Gupta, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner impugns an order dated 5.11.2012 passed in an appeal, which resultantly set aside the order dated 1.8.2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge.2. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent/plaintiff had filed a civil suit seeking reliefs of mandatory and permanent injunction as well as compensation/damages of Rs.1.85 lacs from the petitioner/defendant. The respondent/plaintiff is the exclusive and absolute owner of the third floor of property bearing No.C-10/8B, Krishna Nagar, Delhi-110051 on the basis of a Sale Deed dated 29.6.2011, executed ...
Tag this Judgment!Urmil and Others Vs. Savitri Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on 3rd December, 2014 + CS(OS) 3054/2012 URMIL AND OTHERS Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr. Rajat Aneja, Advocate & Ms. Rashmi Verma, Advocate versus SAVITRI DEVI Through ..... Defendant Mr. Ashok Gurnani, Advocate % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL G.P. Mittal, J.(Oral) CS(OS) 3054/2012 & I.A.18517/2012(O.XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC) 1. This suit for partition has been filed by the Plaintiffs against the Defendant with the averments that Late Shri Tek Chand was the owner of property bearing no.C-2, Shivaji Park, West Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi measuring 438 sq. yds. The property was purchased by the earlier said Late Shri Tek Chand from its previous owner for valuable consideration on the basis of two sale deeds dated 19.07.1962 and 20.07.1962 duly registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar. It is averred that said Late Shri Tek Chand during his life time executed a Will dated 02.04.1986 and on the basis of the said Will, the three P...
Tag this Judgment!Sandeep Singh Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:10. 10.2014 Date of Decision:03. 12.2014 + WP (C) No.1029 of 2014 SANDEEP SINGH Through: UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ...... Petitioner Mr. Praveen Swarup, Adv. versus ..... Respondents Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr. Malaya Kumar Chand & Mr. S.N. Kaul, Advs. for R-1 to 3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.1. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing and setting aside of the letter/order dated 23.11.2013 issued by respondent No.4, whereby the offer to him of provisional appointment to the post of Sub Inspector/Exe in CISF was withdrawn. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondents for conducting his basic training for the said post as well as for fixation of his seniority to just below the person who was immediately above him in the select list as was declared selected for the post of Sub Inspe...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- Next ›
- Last »