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.
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co Ltd Vs. Yogita and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:5. h March, 2014 MAC.APP. 523/2010 BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Rajat Brar, Adv. versus YOGITA & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: NEMO. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 30.04.2010, whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.9,51,590/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. The counsel for the appellant submits that age of the deceased at the time of accident was 27 years. PW1, wife of the deceased testified that her deceased husband was working as a Marketing Manager with M/s. Ranjana Couriers at NOIDA, UP and was earning Rs.7,000/- per month, however, the claimants could not lead any cogent evidence on record to prove the employment of the deceased or his monthly income, there...
Anila JaIn Vs. Nikunj Singhania
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: March 05, 2014 + RC.REV. 359/2013 & CM No.15110/2013 ANILA JAIN Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Shubhankar Sharma, Adv. versus NIKUNJ SINGHANIA Through ..... Respondent Mr.Puneet Bhatnagar, Adv. with Ms.Richa S. Bhatnagar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. By way of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the petitioner has assailed the eviction order dated 8th April, 2013 of the learned Rent Controller whereby the leave to defend application filed by the petitioner was dismissed for the reason mainly that the same was not filed within the stipulated period prescribed under the Act.2. The respondent had filed an eviction petition being No.E-17/12 against the petitioner under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act in respect of a room bearing No.3B, with Balcony alongwith com...
Smt Archana Kapoor and ors Vs. Jay Shri Sabhanani and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:5. h March, 2014 MAC.APP. 173/2012 SMT ARCHANA KAPOOR & ORS ..... Appellants Represented by: Mr. R.P. Sharma and Mr. Vaibhav Mehra, Advs. versus JAY SHRI SABHANANI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Amit Gaur, Adv. for R3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 13.12.2011, whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.13,77,207/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Vide this appeal, the appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation amount as noted above.3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that on the date of accident, the deceased was 41 years of age; he was self-employed; and was earning Rs.15,000 to Rs.25,000/- per month. Accordingly, keeping in view the Income Tax Return on record, Ld. Tr...
Manish Kumar Vs. Hemlata Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment pronounced on: March 05, 2014 RC.REV. 15/2013, C.M. Nos.540/2013, 809/2013 & 1138/2013 MANISH KUMAR Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Mohit Chaudhary, Adv. with Ms.Damini Chawla, Adv. versus HEMLATA Through ..... Respondent Ms.Manisha Agrawal Narain, Adv. AND + C.R.P. 77/2013 & C.M. No.6576/2013 MANISH KUMAR Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Mohit Chaudhary, Adv. with Ms.Damini Chawla, Adv. versus HEMLATA SHARMA Through ..... Respondent Ms.Manisha Agrawal Narain, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. By way of the present petition under Section 115 of CPC, the petitioner has assailed the eviction order dated 26th March, 2013 passed by the learned Addl. Rent Controller whereby the leave to defend application filed by the petitioner was dismissed for the reason mainly that the same was not filed within the stipulated period prescribed under the Act.2. Brief facts for the purpose of adjudication of the present petiti...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Babita Mishra and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % FAO4452010 5th March, 2014 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ......Appellant Through: Mr. D.D.Singh and Mr. Navdeep Singh, Advocates. VERSUS BABITA MISHRA & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents Ms. Monika, Adv. for Mr. S.N.Parashar, Advocate for R-1 to 5. 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 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 impugning the judgment of the Commissioner dated 9.9.2010 by which the claim petition filed by the claimants, respondents no.1 to 5 herein was allowed by awarding compensation of Rs.4,24,387/-. It is not in dispute that the deceased employee Sh. Dalip Kumar Mishra was working as a driver with respondent no.5 herein and while performing his duties of driving the vehicle no.DL-DIM-0606 on 14.2.2008 he was kidnapped alongwith the vehicle and thereafter found murdered. FIR was registered at police station Seema...
Pawan Kumar Vs. Shiv Chaudhary and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:5. h March, 2014 % + MAC.APP. No.728/2013 & CM No.12234/2013 PAWAN KUMAR Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr. K.K. Dubey, Advocate. Versus SHIV CHAUDHARY & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr. Amit Gaur, Advocate for Respondent No.3/Insurance Company. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. This appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 14.08.2012, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation for a sum of Rs.3,96,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization of the amount in favour of the appellant for the injuries received in the accident.2. Vide the present appeal, the appellant is seeking enhancement of compensation amount noted above.3. The Appeal is accompanied by an application under consideration which is for condonation of delay of 252 days in filing the appeal.4. Before considering the merits of th...
Union of India and ors. Vs. Shanti Gurung and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order Reserved on:5. th February, 2014 Order Pronounced on:5. th March, 2014 + OA1462013 in CS(OS) 610/2012 U NION O F INDIA & ORS . ..... P LA IN TIFFS Through: Mr. A. S. Chandioke, Senior Advocate with Ms. Yamini Khurana , Advocate versus S HANTI GURUNG & ORS . ..... D EFENDAN TS Through: Mr. Mohit Choudhary with Ms. Jayshree Satpute, Ms. Damini Chawla and Ms. Pragya Singh, Advocates for Defendant No.1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.OA No.146/2013 1. The Plaintiffs have filed the Chamber Appeal impugning the order dated 06.09.2013 of the Joint Registrar. The Joint Registrar by the order of 06.09.2013 allowed the application of the Defendant ===================================================================== No.1 for condonation of delay of 129 days in filing the Written Statement. The Joint Registrar by the impugned order has held that though the Defendant could have filed the reasonable time after Writte...
Vijay Sirohi Vs. Sh. Sushil Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.127/2013 5th March, 2014 % VIJAY SIROHI ......Appellant Through: None. VERSUS SH. SUSHIL SHARMA ...... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Nos. 10124/2013 (condonation of delay in filing) and 10126/2013 (condonation of delay in re-filing) 1. For the reasons stated in the applications, delay in filing and re- filing the appeal is condoned. C.Ms stand disposed of. + RSA No.127/2013 2. No one appears for the appellant although it is 12.10 P.M. Even on the last effective date i.e 24.7.2013, no one appeared for the appellant. No presence is also recorded for the appellant on 22.11.2013 when the learned Single Judge was not holding the Court.3. This Regular Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugning the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 8.11.2010 and the first a...
Raj Vidya Kender and anr Vs. Mohan Lal Maurya
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.355/2013 & CM No.14254/13 (Stay) 5th March, 2014 % RAJ VIDYA KENDER & ANR Through: ......Appellant Mr. Samrat Nigam and Ms. Aishwarya, Advocates. VERSUS MOHAN LAL MAURYA Through: ...... Respondent Mr. S.K.Chaubey, Advocate CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Respondent has been served way back for 11.9.2013. Today we are in March, 2014 i.e six months after. An adjournment is asked for on behalf of the respondent for reading the case file. I refuse to grant the same, inasmuch as, it is necessary that counsel must not seek adjournment only for convenience on the ground that they are not prepared although they had sufficient time. This attitude is responsible for unnecessary pendency in courts. Besides, the facts of this case as stated below will show that the prayer for adjournment is not benign.2. This first appeal is filed by the appellant (alleged employer) aga...
Angel Broking Ltd. Vs. Arti JaIn and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO652014 & CM No.4232/2014 5th March, 2014 % ANGEL BROKING LTD. Through: ......Appellant Mr. Vikas Tomar, Adv. VERSUS ARTI JAIN & ANR. ...... Respondents Through: 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 by the appellant-broking company against the impugned order of the court below dated 16.1.2014 which had dismissed the objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter the Act) filed by the appellant against the Award passed by the sole arbitrator Justice (retired) M.A.Khan allowing the claim petition filed by the respondent and awarding a sum of Rs.9,80,000/- alongwith interest at 10% p.a.2. The case which was pleaded before the arbitrator by the respondent/claimant was that the Branch Manager of the appellant one Sh. R.Vishwanath carried out illegal trades from her capital segment account by utilizing the c...
- ‹ Prev
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- Next ›
- Last »