Delhi Court March 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.
Smt Sarita and ors. Vs. Shri Vimlesh and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
$~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:27. h March, 2014 + MAC.APP. No.1110/2013 SMT SARITA & ORS. ..... Appellants Represented by: Mr. N.P.Nehra, Adv. Versus SHRI VIMLESH & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. L.K.Tyagi, Adv. for R3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM. No.19415/2013 In view of the averments made in the application, the delay in filing the instant appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. + MAC.APP. No.1110/2013 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 28.02.2013, whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.27,13,000/- with interest as per the directions of Tribunal.2. Vide the present appeal, appellants / claimants are seeking enhancement of the compensation amount noted above.3. Mr. N.P. Nehra, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the deceased on the date of accident was 32 years of age and was earning his li...
Aurum Infocomm Limited Vs. Sh. Desh Raj Mangal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.479/2013 % AURUM INFOCOMM LIMITED Through:27. h March, 2014 ......Appellant Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. VERSUS SH. DESH RAJ MANGAL Through: ...... Respondent Mr. Shiv Kumar Gupta, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No.20177/13 (delay) For the reasons stated in the application, delay is condoned. CM stands disposed of. FAO No.479/2013 & CM No.20175/2013 (stay) 1. This first appeal is filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act) impugning the judgment of the court below dated 29.8.2013 by which the objections filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act against the Award of the arbitrator dated 12.1.2013 were dismissed. By the Award, the arbitrator awarded a sum of Rs.1 lac in favour of the respondent-claimant against the appellant/objector with interest at 12% per annum pendente lite and future.2. The facts of the...
Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Desi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:27. 03.2014 + W.P. (C) 2028/2014 CM APPL.4234/2014 FRANKFINN AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Venkataraman, Sr. Advocate with Mr. K.G. Rajeshwari and Mr. R. Satish Kumar, Advocates. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DESIGNATED AUTHORITY,VCES, SERVICE TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) 1. Issue notice. Mr. Satish Kumar, learned counsel for the Revenue accepts notice. With consent, the matter was heard finally.2. The petitioner carries out vocational training for Air Hostesses/Stewards and in the hospitality and management sector. It states that the courses are designed in a manner that the students after completion of their training can also start their own enterprises in the field. It is contended that the petitioner took advantage of an exemption notif...
Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Nawab Jan and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:27. h March, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 1008/2011 & CM. No.20687/2011 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. Versus NAWAB JAN & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: NEMO. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP. 1008/2011 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 20.09.2011 whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.10,52,208/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till realization of the amount.2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that Ld. Tribunal has wrongly held that the onus to prove that there was no permit on the fateful day was not duly discharged as no witness from the RTO was summoned by the Insurance Company. If the notice under Order 12 Rule 8 CPC has been duly served upon the owner of the offending vehicle, in such ev...
New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Vivek Arora and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
$~16-19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:27. h March, 2014 + MAC.APP. 107/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. Versus DIKSHA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Amit Kumar Pandey and Mr.Atul Aggarwal, Advocates for Respondent No.1. AND + MAC.APP. 110/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. Versus VIVEK ARORA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Amit Kumar Pandey and Mr.Atul Aggarwal, Advocates for Respondent No.1. AND + MAC.APP. 111/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. MAC.APP. Nos.107,110, 111, & 113 of 2012 ..... Appellant Page 1 of 6 Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. Versus VIVEK ARORA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Amit Kumar Pandey and Mr.Atul Aggarwal, Advocates for Respondent No.1. AND + MAC.APP. 113/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. Versus...
New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Diksha and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
$~16-19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:27. h March, 2014 + MAC.APP. 107/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. Versus DIKSHA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Amit Kumar Pandey and Mr.Atul Aggarwal, Advocates for Respondent No.1. AND + MAC.APP. 110/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. Versus VIVEK ARORA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Amit Kumar Pandey and Mr.Atul Aggarwal, Advocates for Respondent No.1. AND + MAC.APP. 111/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. MAC.APP. Nos.107,110, 111, & 113 of 2012 ..... Appellant Page 1 of 6 Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. Versus VIVEK ARORA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Amit Kumar Pandey and Mr.Atul Aggarwal, Advocates for Respondent No.1. AND + MAC.APP. 113/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. Versus...
Amrutappa and ors Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1498/2014 AMRUTAPPA & ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Saqib, Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA ORDER2703.2014 % : VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J.1. Petitioners by this writ petition seek the relief of being granted the pay scale of Assistant Grade in PB-II Rs.9300-34800/- with grade pay of Rs.4200/- from respective due dates. The basis of claim of the relief prayed is that as per the Modified Assured Career Promotion Scheme (MACP Scheme) Petitioners are entitled not only to the one step higher grade pay/pay band, but Petitioners should get the higher pay of the next promotion post. Petitioners therefore essentially seek quashing of para 2 of Annexure-1 of the MACP Scheme dated 19.5.2009, and which para reads as under:The MACPs envisages merely placement in the immediate next higher...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Shanti Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.303/2010 27th March, 2014 % ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ....Appellant Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Advocate. VERSUS SMT. SHANTI DEVI AND ORS. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. Prabhakar, Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr. V.K. Tandon, Advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This first appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the impugned order of the Commissioner dated 17.5.2010 by which the Commissioner allowed the claim petition filed by the respondent nos.1 and 2 herein (mother and wife of the deceased employee). Appellant/insurance company was the respondent no.3 before the Commissioner, and on deletion of the respondent no.3 it became the respondent no.2.2. The facts of the case are that the deceased Sh. Dalip Kumar, aged 25 years was employed as a driver f...
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sharda and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
$~R-9A * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:27. h March, 2014 % + MAC.APP.No.516/2006 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate. Versus SMT. SHARDA & ORS. Represented by: .....Respondents None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) + MAC.APP.No.516/2006 1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Company challenging the impugned award dated 16.03.2006, whereby the learned Tribunal had granted compensation for an amount of Rs.4,06,680/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company submits that while calculating the loss of dependency, the learned Tribunal had deducted one-third of the income of the deceased towards personal expenses and keeping in mind the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, applied the multiplier of 1...
icici Bank Ltd. Vs. Chandra Proteco Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL. REV. P. 54/2010 & Crl. M.A. Nos.1055/2010, 2484/2010 % Date of Decision :27. h March, 2014 ICICI BANK LTD. Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. A.K. Singh with Mr.Pramod K. Tiwary, Ms.Geetanjali Khanna, Mr.Anupam Singh, Advs. versus CHANDRA PROTECO LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Rohit Kumar and Mr.Amit Kumar, Advs. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Aggarwal, General Manager (Finance), Respondent No.1. CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 3 rd November, 2009 whereby its complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 has been returned by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for lack of territorial jurisdiction.2. The respondents issued four cheques bearing nos. 540162 dated 25th July, 2008 for Rs.14,00,000/-, 540159 dated 25th July, 2008 for Rs.20,00,000/-, 540160 dated 25th July, 2008 for Rs.20,00,000/- and 540163 dated 25th July, 2008 for Rs.6,67,740/all drawn on...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »