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.
Hoti Lal Vs. Delhi Development Authority and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: February 05, 2014 + LPA8172013 HOTI LAL Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Rajender Dutt, Advocate versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Rajiv Bansal, Advocate with Mr.Anchit Sharma, Advocate for R-1/DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Residents of a slum cluster which was named by the inhabitants as Sawan Park were proposed to be resettled by the Delhi Development Authority by relocating the slum dwellers to Wazirpur Residential Area Phase-IV in the year 1984. The slum cluster had come up on land comprised in Khasras No.646, 649 and 650. A survey was carried out and a list prepared in which the names of persons residing in the Jhuggis were entered. Appellant was one such person. He was intimated of he being entitled to a 32 square meter plot of land in Wazirpur Residential Area Phase-IV. But before appellant could o...
Bharat Bhushan Vs. State, Through A.C. Branch, Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:05. 02.2014 + CRL. A. No.603 of 2010 BHARAT BHUSHAN Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Bharat Sharma & Mr. Siddharth Gupta, Advs. versus STATE, THROUGH A.C. BRANCH, DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGEMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) On 11.8.2006 at about 10:00 a.m. the complainant Kailash S/o Nathu Ram came to the Office of the Anti Corruption Branch and made a complaint Ex.PW2/A in the presence of a panch witness Shri Ravinder Kumar. The complainant alleged that on 7.8.2006, he went to Sheikh Sarai Authority to obtain a learners driving license and met the Inspector and other employees present there but none of them bothered about him. When he was getting down the stairs, one person, who gave his name as Niku, asked him as to whether he wanted to obtain a driving license. He further stated that Niku also told him that the learners driving licens...
Surinder Singh (Now Deceased) Through Lrs Vs. Surbir Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h February, 2014 % + RFA1152013 & CM No.3539/2013 (for stay) SURINDER SINGH (NOW DECEASED) THROUGH LRS ....Appellant Through: Mr. Pramod Ahuja, Adv. Versus SURBIR SINGH & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Deepak Khadaria, Adv. AND + RFA1182013 & CM No.3562/2013 (for stay) SURINDER SINGH (NOW DECEASED) THROUGH LRS ....Appellant Through: Mr. Pramod Ahuja, Adv. Versus SURBIR SINGH & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Deepak Khadaria, Adv. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. RFA No.115/2013 impugns the judgment and decree (dated 31st January, 2013 of the Court of the Addl. District Judge (North)-01, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in CS No.54/2009 filed by the respondent no.1 therein Shri Surbir Singh against the deceased appellant Shri Surinder Singh and the respondent no.2 therein Shri Rama Murthy) of recovery of possession from the appellants and the respondent no.2 of Plot No.D-121, Mayapuri, Pha...
United India Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Kauser Jahan and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:5. h February, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 657/2010 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.S.K.Ray, Advocate. Versus KAUSER JAHAN & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Vinod Sharma, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 05.05.2010, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation for a sum of Rs.78,705/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization of the amount.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company submitted that the present appeal is filed mainly on the ground that respondent No.2/driver of the offending vehicle was not holding valid driving licence to drive Heavy Motor Vehicle (Passenger) on the date of the accident, i.e., 18.03.2006, despite that the learned Tribunal ...
Vikram Thapa @ Mangal Pandey Vs. the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
$-3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :5. h FEBRUARY, 2014 + CRL.A. 948/2012 VIKRAM THAPA @ MANGAL PANDEY ..... Appellant Through : Ms. Saahila Lamba, Advocate. Versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. SI Manoj Kumar, PS Punjabi Bagh. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. Abhishek @ Pritam and Vikram Thapa @ Mangal Pandey (the appellant) were arrested in case FIR No.13/11 by the police of PS Mandir Marg for committing offences under Sections 392/397/411/34 IPC and sent for trial alleging that on 18.01.2011 at about 09.30 P.M. near Lady Harding hospital, they in furtherance of common intention inflicted injuries to the complainant Dinesh Prasad and deprived him of his mobile phone and cash ` 8,000/- at the point of knife. Abhishek @ Pritam was apprehended at the spot whereas Vikram Thapa @ Mangal Pandey succeeded to escape from the spot. First Information Report was lodged after recording Dinesh Prasads s...
New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Gyan Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:5. h February, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 693/2010 & CM No.18770/2010 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate. Versus GYAN DEVI & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP. 693/2010 1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 04.08.2010, whereby the learned Tribunal while granting compensation has not exonerated the appellant/Insurance Company from liability to pay compensation despite the fact that the respondent No.3, i.e., driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid driving licence on the date of the accident.2. Admittedly, recovery rights have been granted in favour of the appellant/Insurance Company.3. Similar issue has been dealt with by this Court in the case bearing MAC. APP. No.805/2010, titled as Santosh Chhabra & Ors. Vs.Abhishek Gureja & Ors., decided on 04.10.2...
Director of Income Tax Vs. M/S E Funds It Solution
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL No.735/2011 Reserved on:29. h October, 2013 Date of Decision:5. h February, 2014 % DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal & Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel. Versus M/S E FUNDS IT SOLUTION ..... Respondent Through Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anand Sukumar, Advocate. INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS. 736/2011 & 737/2011 DIT-1 INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal & Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel. Versus M/S E FUNDS CROPORATION ..... Respondent Through Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anand Sukumar, Advocate. INCOME TAX APPEAL No.738/2011 DIT-1 INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal & Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel. Versus M/S E FUNDS IT SOLUTION INC. ..... Respondent Through Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anand Sukumar, Advocate. INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS. 739/2011 & 740/2011 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Th...
Shailesh Kumar Pandey Vs. Research and Assessment Centre and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on February 05, 2014 + W.P.(C) 834/2014 SHAILESH KUMAR PANDEY Represented by: versus ..... Petitioner Mr. R.K.Pathak, Advocate RESEARCH AND ASSESSMENT CENTRE AND ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms. Meera Bhatia, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.(Oral) CM No.1669/2014 (for condonation of delay) This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 201 days in re-filing the writ petition. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. W.P.(C) 834/2014 1. The petitioner, Shailesh Kumar Pandey impugns Award dated October 05, 2012 passed by the Industrial Tribunal No.1, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, whereby the Industrial Tribunal holds that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as he is an employee of the contractor.2. It was the case of the petitioner before the Industrial Tribunal that he was employed as Security Guard in July, 1989 and his services were terminated by the re...
Md. Rinku Ali Vs. the State (Govt. of Nct) Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
$-9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :5. h FEBRUARY, 2014 + CRL.A. 149/2014 MD. RINKU ALI ..... Appellant Through : Ms.Suman Chauhan, Advocate. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT), DELHI Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG CRL.M.A.No.1988/2014 (Delay) Issue notice. Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State accepts notice. State has no objection for condonation of delay. For the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, the delay is condoned. The application for condonation of delay is disposed of. CRL.A. 149/2014 Admit. Since the appellant has already undergone about two years and eight months incarceration, with the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for hearing on merits today itself. S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. Md. Rinku Ali (the appellant) and Manoj were arrested by the police of PS Delhi Cantt. in case FIR No.109/09 under Sections 397/411/34 IPC and sent for trial o...
Sunil Chand Gupta and ors Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :30. 01.2014 Judgment delivered on :05. 02.2014 CRL.A. 28/2002 SUNIL CHAND GUPTA & ORS. Through: ..... Appellants Mr.D.M.Bhalla and Ms.Gousia Shah, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Fizani Hussain, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 Appellants before this Court are Sunil Chand and Bimla Devi. They are aggrieved by the judgment and order of sentence dated 07.12.2001 and 13.12.2001 respectively wherein accused Sunil Chand had been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC; co-accused Bimla Devi had been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC as also for the offence under Section 376 read with Section 109 of the IPC. Accused Sunil Chand had been sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for three months. Accused Bimla Devi had also been sentenced for the same period w...
- ‹ Prev
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- Next ›
- Last »