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.
Groupon, Inc Vs. Mohan Rao and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:16. 09.2013 Judgment delivered on:19. 03-2014 CS(OS) 1346/2011 GROUPON, INC Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Sanjay Jain, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ashish Marbaniang, Mr. Deepak Gogia, Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, Ms. Noor Anand and Ms. Aastha Jain, Advocates versus MOHAN RAO AND ANOTHER ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. J.Saideepak, Ms. Sneha Jain and Ms. Julien George, Advocates CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.I.A. Nos. 8969/2011 (u/o 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC) & 10581/2011 (under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC1 These applications have been filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter CPC) against defendant no.1 &2 praying for an order of ad-interim temporary injunction pending hearing and final disposal of the suit and by the defendants under Order 39, Rule 4, CPC praying for an order vacating the ex parte ad interim injunction granted...
Shahid and ors. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on : March 19th , 2014 % + CRL.A. 59/2000 SHAHID & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. R.D. Rana, Advocate.-.versus- STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Jasbir Kaur, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL JUDGMENT VEENA BIRBAL, J.1. The present appeal is filed against the judgment dated 19.01.2000 and order of sentence dated 21.01.2000 in sessions case no.251/97 arising out of FIR No.177/97 registered under Section 307/34 IPC, P.S. Sadar Bazar, whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted the appellants under Section 307/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 10 years and a fine of `20,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo S.I. for 2 years each. Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. has been given to them.2. The case of the prosecution is based on statement Ex.PW4/A of injured Jamil PW-4 wherein he has alleged that on 22.04.1997 at about 9.15 P.M. he was standing in Chota Maidan of Qasabpure....
Amrit Pal Singh Vs. M/S Alpha Motor Finance Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
* + % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO2822013 & conn. 19th March, 2014 FAO2822013 AMRIT PAL SINGH ......Appellant Through: None. VERSUS M/s ALPHA MOTOR FINANCE LTD. & ANR. ...... Respondents. Through: Mr. Kunal Madan, Adv. for R-1. + FAO2832013 AMRIT PAL SINGH ......Appellant Through: None. VERSUS M/s ALPHA MOTOR FINANCE LTD. & ANR. ...... Respondents. Through: Mr. Kunal Madan, Adv. for R-1. + FAO2842013 AMRIT PAL SINGH ......Appellant Through: None. VERSUS M/s ALPHA MOTOR FINANCE LTD. & ANR. ...... Respondents. Through: Mr. Kunal Madan, Adv. for R-1 + FAO2852013 AMRIT PAL SINGH ......Appellant Through: FAO2822013 & conn. None. Page 1 of 6 VERSUS M/s ALPHA MOTOR FINANCE LTD. & ANR. ...... Respondents. Through: Mr. Kunal Madan, Adv. for R-1. + FAO2862013 AMRIT PAL SINGH ......Appellant Through: None. VERSUS M/s ALPHA MOTOR FINANCE LTD. & ANR. ...... Respondents. Through: Mr. Kunal Madan, Adv. for R-1. + FAO2872013 AMRIT PAL SINGH ......Appellant Through: None. VERSUS M/s AL...
Mohd. Anis Ahmed Vs. VipIn Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
$~R40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:19. h March, 2014 + MAC.APP. No.136/2007 MOHD. ANIS AHMED ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms. Monika, Adv. for Mr. S.N. Parashar, Adv. Versus VIPIN KUMAR AND ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms. Hetu Arora Sethi, Adv. for R2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 04.12.2006, whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.54,000/- with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till realization of the amount.2. Vide this appeal, the appellant is seeking enhancement of the compensation amount as noted above.3. The facts of the case are that the appellant received injuries in the roadside accident took place on 16.03.2004, due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of Truck No.HR-38-G-0731. The claimant deposed that accident had taken place due to sole rash and negli...
Badshah Singh Vs. Delhi Water Supply and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on March 06, 2014 Judgment Delivered on March 19, 2014 + W.P.(C) 4068/1999 BADSHAH SINGH Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajiv Aggarwal, Advocate versus DELHI WATER SUPPLY & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Sakshi Popli, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.1. The challenge in this writ petition is to the award dated April 30, 1999 of the Industrial Tribunal in I.D. No.351/1990 whereby the Industrial Tribunal has held that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.2. The award was given on an Industrial Dispute referred to the Industrial Tribunal by the appropriate Government with the following terms of reference:Whether Sh. Badshah Singh has abandoned his services or his services have been terminated illegally and/or unjustifiably by the management and if so, to what relief he is entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect.3. It was the case of the petitioner bef...
Oriental Insurance Company Vs. Madhu Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:19. h March, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 1089/2011 & CM No.21857/2011 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath, Advocate. Versus MADHU SHARMA & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.R.P.Singh, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP. 1089/2011 1. The instant appeal is preferred against the award dated 09.09.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.6,87,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company submits that the alleged offending vehicle No.UP14E8465was not involved in the accident, despite, the learned Tribunal held the appellant company liable to pay the compensation.3. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of this ...
Ram Prakash Vs. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO3132013 19th March, 2014 % RAM PRAKASH Through: ......Appellant Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate VERSUS NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR....... Respondents Through: Mr. Pranav Sapra, Mr. Sunil Goel, Advocates CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This first appeal is filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter the Act) impugning the judgment of the court below dated 12.2.2013 by which the objections filed by the appellant/objector under Section 34 of the Act against the Award dated 8.6.2010 have been dismissed.2. Appellant was awarded the work of Improvement and Stg. of BBM Road from Mall Road to Mukherjee Nagar Bandh on 1.4.2004, Work commenced on 15.4.2004 and was completed on 8.6.2004. As per the appellant, he did extra work, but was not paid, and an amount of Rs. 46,498/- was wrongly withheld by the respondent.3. The case o...
Capt. M.P. Premi (Retd.) Vs. M/S. India International Airways Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on March 13, 2014 Judgment Delivered on March 19, 2014 + W.P.(C) 21899/2005 CAPT. M.P. PREMI (RETD.) Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr. Shailender S.Dahiya, Advocate versus M/S. INDIA INTERNATIONAL AIRWAYS LTD. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Jaideep Bedi, Advocate with Mr. Dipender Kumar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.1. In the writ petition, the challenge has been made by the petitioner to the award dated August 11, 2005 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court (Industrial Tribunal, in short) in I.D. No.37/2001 to the extent, the Industrial Tribunal has concluded that the retirement age of the petitioner was 58 years, as provided in Service Rules and further held that the petitioner was entitled to get wages of ` 44,702/- per month, instead of ` 1,24,200/-, and granted the benefit of arrears for four months only, instead of approximately six months if ...
New India Assurance Company Ltd. New Delhi Vs. Sh. Bachu Singh, Gurgao ...
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
S.C. Jain, Member 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/OP against complainant/respondent under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (herein after called the Act). 2. The relevant facts of the appeal are that, complainant/respondent was the owner of vehicle No UP-14-803794 Tavera Jeep, having cases No. MA6AB6G768 and Engine No. 3FH 80489, the jeep was a tourist vehicle under tourist permit. It was insured with appellant/OP for a sum of Rs. 6,92,817/- for the period of 30.08.2008 to 29.06.2009. This vehicle was parked near Kilkar Car Petrol Pump, Sector-10, Rohini, Delhi-110085 on 30.10.2008, and the driver was sleeping in the vehicle. Three persons claiming themselves from the Crime Branch of the Police, came and asked the driver to see their officer sitting in the vehicle at a distance of 10-15 yards. When the driver of the jeep went to see the said officer, having left the key inside the jeep, the three miscreants immediately started the jeep and fled away with it....
New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Bachu Singh
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
S.A. Siddiqui, Member (Judicial): 1) This appeal has been filed by the appellant/OP against complainant/respondent under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (herein after called the Act). 2) The relevant facts of the appeal are that, complainant/respondent was the owner of vehicle No UP-14-803794 Tavera Jeep, having cases No. MA6AB6G768 and Engine No. 3FH 80489, the jeep was a tourist vehicle under tourist permit. It was insured with appellant/OP for a sum of Rs. 6,92,817/- for the period of 30.08.2008 to 29.06.2009. This vehicle was parked near Kilkar Car Petrol Pump, Sector-10, Rohini, Delhi-110085 on 30.10.2008, and the driver was sleeping in the vehicle. Three persons claiming themselves from the Crime Branch of the Police, came and asked the driver to see their officer sitting in the vehicle at a distance of 10-15 yards. When the driver of the jeep went to see the said officer, having left the key inside the jeep, the three miscreants immediately started the jeep and fl...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »