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.
M/S Ms Shoes East Ltd. Vs. India Securities Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Order delivered on: March 24, 2014 CS(OS) No.2161/2012 & I.A. No.12989/2012 M/S MS SHOES EAST LTD Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Pavan Sachdeva, AR versus INDIA SECURITIES LTD. Through ..... Defendant Defendant already ex parte. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The abovementioned suit has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 14 & 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (in short, called the Act) with a prayer to pass a judgment in terms of the Award dated 30th May, 2012 and decree the suit for Rs.5,62,91,828/- with future interest @ 18% per annum till the date of realization of payment from the defendant, in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.2. Along with the suit, the plaintiff has also filed an application being I.A. No.12989/2012 under Section 28 of the Act seeking extension of time of arbitration proceedings from 20th August, 2007 till 30th May, 2012, i.e. the date on which the Award was mad...
M/S Ms Shoes East Ltd. Vs. Pl Finance and Investment Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Order delivered on: March 24, 2014 CS(OS) No.2153/2012 & I.A. No.12968/2012 M/S MS SHOES EAST LTD Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Pavan Sachdeva, AR versus PL FINANCE & INVESTMENT LTD ..... Defendant Through Defendant already ex parte. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The abovementioned suit has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 14 & 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (in short, called the Act) with a prayer to pass a judgment in terms of the Award dated 30th May, 2012 and decree the suit for Rs.5,60,97,445/- with future interest @ 18% per annum till the date of realization of payment from the defendant, in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.2. Along with the suit, the plaintiff has also filed an application being I.A. No.12968/2012 under Section 28 of the Act seeking extension of time of arbitration proceedings from 20th August, 2007 till 30th May, 2012, i.e. the date on which the Award w...
M/S Ms Shoes East Ltd. Vs. Teji Brar Financial Services Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Order delivered on: March 24, 2014 CS(OS) No.2091/2012 & I.A. No.12766/2012 M/S MS SHOES EAST LTD Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Pavan Sachdeva, AR versus TEJI BRAR FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. ..... Defendant Through Defendant already ex parte. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The abovementioned suit has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 14 & 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (in short, called the Act) with a prayer to pass a judgment in terms of the Award dated 23rd May, 2012 and decree the suit for Rs.47,89,603/- with future interest @ 18% per annum till the date of realization of payment from the defendant, in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.2. Along with the suit, the plaintiff has also filed an application being I.A. No.12766/2012 under Section 28 of the Act seeking extension of time of arbitration proceedings from 20th August, 2007 till 23rd May, 2012, i.e. the date on which the Awa...
M/S Ms Shoes East Ltd. Vs. M/S Interface Capital Markets Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Order delivered on: March 24, 2014 CS(OS) No.2126/2012 & I.A. No.12880/2012 M/S MS SHOES EAST LTD Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Pavan Sachdeva, AR versus M/S INTERFACE CAPITAL MARKETS PVT LTD. ..... Defendant Through Defendant already ex parte. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The abovementioned suit has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 14 & 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (in short, called the Act) with a prayer to pass a judgment in terms of the Award dated 30th May, 2012 and decree the suit for Rs.1,40,103/- with future interest @ 18% per annum till the date of realization of payment from the defendant, in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.2. Along with the suit, the plaintiff has also filed an application being I.A. No.12880/2012 under Section 28 of the Act seeking extension of time of arbitration proceedings from 20th August, 2007 till 30th May, 2012, i.e. the date on which the...
M/S Ms Shoes East Ltd. Vs. Llyods Finance Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Order delivered on: March 24, 2014 CS(OS) No.2155/2012 & I.A. No.12972/2012 M/S MS SHOES EAST LTD Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Pavan Sachdeva, AR versus LLYODS FINANCE LTD Through ..... Defendant Defendant already ex parte. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The abovementioned suit has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 14 & 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (in short, called the Act) with a prayer to pass a judgment in terms of the Award dated 30th May, 2012 and decree the suit for Rs.19,18,71,015/- with future interest @ 18% per annum till the date of realization of payment from the defendant, in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.2. Along with the suit, the plaintiff has also filed an application being I.A. No.12972/2012 under Section 28 of the Act seeking extension of time of arbitration proceedings from 20th August, 2007 till 30th May, 2012, i.e. the date on which the Award was made ...
M/S Ms Shoes East Ltd. Vs. Niyati Leasing Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Order delivered on: March 24, 2014 CS(OS) No.2074/2012 & I.A. No.12726/2012 M/S MS SHOES EAST LTD Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Pavan Sachdeva, AR versus NIYATI LEASING LTD. Through ..... Defendant Defendant already ex parte. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The abovementioned suit has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 14 & 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (in short, called the Act) with a prayer to pass a judgment in terms of the Award dated 23rd May, 2012 and decree the suit for Rs.35,25,382/- with future interest @ 18% per annum till the date of realization of payment from the defendant, in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.2. Along with the suit, the plaintiff has also filed an application being I.A. No.12726/2012 under Section 28 of the Act seeking extension of time of arbitration proceedings from 20th August, 2007 till 23rd May, 2012, i.e. the date on which the Award was made by...
Umesh Narang Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
S.A. SiddiquiMember(Judicial): 1) This appeal has been filed by complainant appellant under section 15 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Hereinafter called Act) against order dated 02.07.2010 passed by Ld. DCDRF (East) Saini Enclave, New Delhi, in complaint case No.613/09 Umesh Narang Vs. LIC of India. 2) Brief facts giving rise to the filing of this appeal are noted below: i) Complainant appellant secured œLIC Jeevan Asha II Policy? No.121989082 dated 20.03.2003. The sum assured under the policy was Rs.3/- Lacs which cover major/minor surgical procedures. The complainant paid insurance premium regularly. ii) The complainant/appellant underwent a major surgery/ procedure for cardio-vascular system in Fortis Hospital and remained admitted there from 28.02.2008 to 05.03.2008. He incurred an expenditure of Rs.7,55,995/- for ICD implantation. After discharge from the hospital, the complainant appellant filed medical claim alongwith all necessary documents but the OP LIC repudiated th...
Sh. Umesh Narang, Up. Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India Delhi Di ...
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
S.A. Siddiqui Judicial Member 1. This appeal has been filed by complainant appellant under section 15 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Hereinafter called Act) against order dated 02.07.2010 passed by Ld. DCDRF (East) Saini Enclave, New Delhi, in complaint case No.613/09 Umesh Narang Vs. LIC of India. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the filing of this appeal are noted below: i) Complainant appellant secured œLIC Jeevan Asha II Policy? No.121989082 dated 20.03.2003. The sum assured under the policy was Rs.3/- Lacs which cover major/minor surgical procedures. The complainant paid insurance premium regularly. ii) The complainant/appellant underwent a major surgery/ procedure for cardio-vascular system in Fortis Hospital and remained admitted there from 28.02.2008 to 05.03.2008. He incurred an expenditure of Rs.7,55,995/- for ICD implantation. After discharge from the hospital, the complainant appellant filed medical claim alongwith all necessary documents but the OP LIC repudiated the...
Anil Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Secretary, Rajast ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
Original Appeal No. 146/2013 (CZ) 1. The Applicant had initially preferred Writ Petition No. 21147/2012 in the form of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) before the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan. On the prayer made by the learned counsel for the Applicant M/s Hanuman Mineral and Grinding Mill, Tehla Road, Rajgarh was ordered to be impleaded as party as during the course of hearing it was submitted that the unit was located in the vicinity of the residential area and was causing pollution to the residents as well to the educational institutions located in the area. 2. We find from the record that by way of a letter from the Applicant along with an order passed by the SDO, Rajgarh, District Alwar for conversion of Khasra No. 1714 and 1715, Ramuwala Kuwa village over which the unit of M/s Hanuman Mineral and Grinding Mill is located and the said land was ordered to be converted from industrial use to residential use. The said order of the SDO is dated 24th February, 2014. From the avermen...
Naresh Gupta Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: March 24, 2014 + CRL.A. 316/1998 NARESH GUPTA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Anurag Jain, Advocate Versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through ..... Respondent Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.1. Challenge in the present appeal is the impugned judgment dated and order on sentence dated 30.07.1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby the appellant has been held guilty for committing an offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment together with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, the appellant was directed to further undergo RI for a period of six months.2. The case of the prosecution in brief, can be summarized as under:On 24.06.1984 at about 6.55 p.m., SI Ashutosh was handed over a copy of the DD Report...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »