Delhi Court February 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.
Ramesh Chander Sharma Vs. Rajinder Pershad Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.51/2014 & CM No.2867/2014 % 12th February, 2014 RAMESH CHANDER SHARMA ......Appellant Through: Appellant in person. VERSUS RAJINDER PERSHAD SHARMA & 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 regular second appeal is filed under Section 100 CPC impugning the judgments of the courts below; of the first appellate court dated 23.10.2013 and the trial court dated 7.1.2004; by which the suit of the appellant-plaintiff has been dismissed inasmuch as with respect to the disputes mentioned in the suit of the partnership firm of M/s Ashoka Industries (India), there were arbitration proceedings, an Award was passed, the said Award was made rule of the court under the Arbitration Act, 1940, and therefore, disputes with regard to the firm M/s Ashoka Industries (India) achieved finality. It may be mentioned that disputes were really as to all t...
Krishan Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:07. 02.2014 Judgment delivered on:12. 02.2014 CRL.A. 967/2001 KRISHAN Through: .... Appellant Mr.Siddhartha Aggarwal and Mr.Adit S. Pujari, Advocates. versus STATE Through: + ..... Respondent Ms.Fizani Hussain, APP. CRL.A. 986/2001 GOPI Through: .... Appellant Mr.Siddhartha Aggarwal and Mr.Adit S. Pujari, Advocates. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Ms.Fizani Hussain, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 The appellants before this Court are Gopi and Krishan. They had been convicted under Section 376(2) for the offence of gang rape and Section 506 Part-I read with Section 34 IPC vide judgment dated 01.5.2001. Vide order of sentence dated 04.5.2001 Gopi had been sentenced RI for 11 years for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC and a fine of Rs.2000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for six months; for the offence under section 506 Part-I he had been sentenced to undergo R...
Jitender and anr. Vs. Manohar Lal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 924/2010 Date of decision: February 12th, 2014 % JITENDER & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. H.K. Monga, Adv. versus MANOHAR LAL & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. O.P. Verma, Advocate for R-1 to 4. Mr. Satish Kumar Verma, APP for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.1. The present appeal is filed against the order of sentence dated 16.4.2010 passed by the learned ASJ, Delhi in SC No.147/2009 titled State vs. Manohar Lal & Ors., FIR No.221/2004 under Section 308/506/34 IPC P.S. Prasad Nagar on behalf of the complainants.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of present appeal are as under:On 4.9.2004 at about 9.37 a.m. DD No.11A Ex.PW8/A was recorded in P.S. Prasad Nagar about a quarrel having taken place at house No.7091/10 Mata Rameshwari, Nehru Nagar, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. On the same day, another DD No.14A Ex.PW8/B was recorded around 10.20 am at the aforesaid police station on the information rec...
Residents Welfare Association B-5 Block, Paschim V Vs. Residents Welfa ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.239/2013 % 12th February, 2014 RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION B-5 BLOCK, PASCHIM VIHAR & ORS. ......Appellants. Through: Ms. Neha Gupta, Adv. VERSUS RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION B-2 BLOCK, PASCHIM VIHAR & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The challenge by means of this regular second appeal is to the judgment of the first appellate court dated 15.7.2013, by which the first appellate court accepted the appeal filed by the defendants against the judgment of the trial court dated 31.8.2012 decreeing the suit for mandatory and permanent injunction for removal of the pillars on the public road.2. The first appellate court allowed the appeal of the defendants inasmuch as the private pillars which were fixed by the defendants in the trial court, and who were the appellants before the first appellate court, were stood removed by the Mu...
Rohit Kumar Gahalot Vs. Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporatio ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6/2012 ROHIT KUMAR GAHALOT ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Tanmaya Mehta, Adv. versus INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ashish Tiwari, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER % 12.02.2014 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 6.7.2010 whereby the services of the petitioner, who was on probation, were terminated.2. The grievance of the petitioner arises in the background of the following broad facts:3. On 10.6.2008, the petitioner was made an offer of appointment by the respondent corporation for appointment to the post of F&B attendant (W1). The petitioner was though, put on probation for a period of two years, which was admittedly liable to be extended at the say so of the respondent corporation.4. Pursuant to the offer of appointment, the petitioner was posted at the New Delhi Railway Station, as an Attendant. The posting order of the petitioner was m...
Harshvardhan Sarangapani Vs. Kotak Mahindra Prime Limited and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:12. 02.2014 + CRL.A. 863 of 2010 HARSHVARDHAN SARANGAPANI Through: None. ..... Appellant versus KOTAK MAHINDRA PRIME LIMITED & ANR...... Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGEMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) The notice sent to the appellant has been received back unserved. Earlier, the notice issued to him through counsel was also received back with an endorsement that he was no more the counsel for the appellant.2. In a complaint filed by the respondent Kotak Mahindra Private Limited under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, the appellant before this Court was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs 1,000/-, on his pleading guilty to the charge. Being aggrieved from the said order, the respondent Kotak Mahindra filed an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.13/2010. Vide impugned judgment dated 31.05.2010, the learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the appeal and sentenced the appellant to undergo imprisonment ...
Munishwar Kumar Vs. Rakesh Kumar and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
$~31. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 804/2012 Date of Decision:12th February, 2014 % MUNISHWAR KUMAR Through : ..... Plaintiff Mr.Amit Jagga, Adv. versus RAKESH KUMAR & ORS Through : ..... Defendants Mr.Baldev Malik and Mr.Arjun Malik, Advs. G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for partition with respect to the property no.24/104, West Patel Nagaar, New Delhi, and for permanent injunction.2. As per the plaint, parties are close relations being real brothers and sisters. The parents of the parties died intestate. The father of the parties, during his life time, out of his own earnings and funds acquired the suit property bearing no.24/2014, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi, by way of registered Lease Deed executed by Land and Development Office in his favour. The father thereafter raised construction over the said property from his own funds and had been residing in the property. The suit property was thereafter converted from lease hold to free ...
Department of Women and Child Development Vs. Urmila Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on February 12, 2014 + W.P.(C) 728/2013, CM No.1405/2013 DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Mr. Kumar Sameer, Advocates versus URMILA DEVI Through: + ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Prasad, Advocate W.P.(C) 729/2013, CM No.1407/2013 DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Mr. Kumar Sameer, Advocates versus SMT. BANARAS GODARA Through: + ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Prasad, Advocate W.P.(C) 730/2013, CM No.1409/2013 DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Mr. Kumar Sameer, Advocates versus RAJA BALA Through: W.P.(C)Nos. 728, 729, 730 & 732 of 2013 ..... Respondent + W.P.(C) 732/2013, CM No.1411/2013 DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Mr. Kumar Sameer, Advocates versus RAM CHANDRI Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Prasad, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTIC...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sh. Subhash Lal and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.369/2013 12th February, 2014 % NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeet Ranjan, Advocate. Versus SH. SUBHASH LAL & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. R.K. Nain, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) + FAO No.369/2013 and C.M. No.15008/2013 (stay) 1. This first appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 impugning the judgment of the Commissioner dated 12.8.2013 which has allowed the claim petition filed by the claimant, respondent no.1 herein.2. The case as set up by the respondent no.1 was that he was employed as a driver by the respondent no.2 herein/employer, respondent no.1 before the Commissioner, for driving of the vehicle bearing No.HR-55N5772which was owned by the employer. On 1.12.2012 he was given instructions to carry out an occupational trip from Mumbai to Delhi and when the vehicle reached D...
M/S. Jiwan Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. Smt. Kamlesh Rani Budhiraja
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.147/2013 12th February, 2014 % M/S. JIWAN INDUSTRIES (P) LTD. ......Appellant Through: Mr. Naresh Thanai, Advocate. VERSUS SMT. KAMLESH RANI BUDHIRAJA ...... Respondent Through: Mr. Vinay Kumar Garg, Advocate CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This regular second appeal is filed by the plaintiff/landlord against the impugned judgment of the first Appellate Court dated 13.5.2013. The first Appellate Court by the impugned judgment allowed the appeal of the defendant/respondent and set aside the judgment dated 30.11.2012 of the trial court by which the trial court had decreed the suit for possession and recovery of damages filed by the appellant/plaintiff against the respondent/defendant.2. The facts as pleaded by the appellant/plaintiff in the plaint were that vide a rent deed, Ex. PW13, the suit property comprising of open land measuring 341 sq. yards forming pa...
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »