Delhi Court April 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 23 of about 432 results (0.020 seconds)M/S Shri Nath Cargo Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/S Parag Sarees
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.79/2014 & CM No.4737/2014 % 17th April, 2014 M/S SHRI NATH CARGO PVT. LTD. ......Appellant Through: Mr. S.K.Srivastava, Advocate VERSUS M/S PARAG SAREES ...... Respondent Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This second appeal is filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugning the judgment of the first appellate court dated 5.2.2014 by which the first appeal was dismissed as barred by limitation. Appellant before the first appellate court and also before this Court was the defendant in the suit. The appellant is a transporter and against whom the suit for recovery of Rs.69,370/- was decreed ex parte by the judgment dated 30.8.2013.2. The first appellate court holds that the ex parte judgment was pronounced on 30.8.2013 but the appellant applied for the certified copy only in October 2013 and filed the appeal in January 2014 clear...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Om Prakash and Others
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. h March, 2014 Decided on:17. h April, 2014 DEATH SENTENCE REF. No.5 of 2012 STATE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Lovkesh Sawhney, APP with Inspector Rajesh Kumar, PS Swaroop Nagar. versus OM PRAKASH AND OTHERS Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sumeet Verma, Advocate. AND CRL. APPEAL No.288 of 2013 SURAJ ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sumeet Verma, Advocate. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. versus STATE AND CRL. APPEAL No.274 of 2013 SANJEEV Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Sumeet Verma, Advocate. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. versus STATE AND CRL. APPEAL No.156 of 2013 MAYA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Joginder Tuli with Mr. Ashu Kumar Sharma, Mr. Tarun Nanda and Mr. Vikhyat Bhagi, Advocates. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. AND CRL. APPEAL No.105 of 2013 KHUSHBOO @ INDERKALA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Sumeet Verma and Ms. Anu Narula, Advocates. versus STATE Through: ...
Tag this Judgment!Manoj Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : March 21, 2014 DECIDED ON : April 17, 2014 + CRL.A.1326/2011 MANOJ ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Sangram Singh, Advocate. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. SI Ram Partap, PS Delhi Cantt. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The appellant-Manoj questions the correctness of a judgment dated 08.09.2011 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.37/10 arising out of FIR No.109/09 registered at Police Station Delhi Cantt. by which he was convicted under Section 392 IPC. By an order dated 12.09.2011, he was sentenced to undergo RI for three years with fine `5,000/-.2. Allegations against the appellant, as depicted in the charge- sheet, were that on 04.05.2009 at 1.40 a.m. at Dhaula Kuan to Delhi Cantt. Road, before Yamaiya Red Light, he and his associate Mohd.Rinku Ali robbed a Maruti Esteem car No.DL1RX-6064 from Sumesh. It is alleged that Mohd.Rinku Ali was arm...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. K.P.S. Malik Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
21 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2520/2013 DR. K.P.S. MALIK Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Manoj Singh with Mr. Sahib Rajput, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Amrit Pal Singh, CGSC for R-1. Dr. Punita K. Sodhi, R-7 in person. % Date of Decision :17. h April, 2014 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) CM APPL. 87/2014 in W.P.(C) 2520/2013 Keeping in view the averments in the application, delay in filing the amended memo of parties is condoned and memo of parties is taken on record. Accordingly, the application stands allowed. W.P.(C) 2520/2013 & CM APPL. 89/2014 1. Present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:a) issue rule nisi; 2. b) Upon return of notice and after calling upon the parties, issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ(s), direction(s) and/or order(s) for quashing of the Office Memorandum No.C1801110/2010-CHS-III (Vol. I) dated 12.07.2012. (ANNEXURE P-7)...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. M/S Dawar Rubber Industries and anr.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO Nos.323/2012 & 326/2012 17th April, 2014 % 1. FAO NO.323/2012 UNION OF INDIA Through: ....Appellant Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate. VERSUS M/S DAWAR RUBBER INDUSTRIES & ANR. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Shiv Khorana, Advocate.2. FAO NO.326/2012 UNION OF INDIA Through: ....Appellant Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate. VERSUS M/S DAWAR RUBBER INDUSTRIES & ANR. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Shiv Khorana, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) FAO No.323/2012 1. The Award in this case passed by the arbitrator and which is dated 15.9.2009 is clearly a non-speaking Award. This becomes clear from paras 9.1 to 9.5 of the Award and which read as under:9.1 All claims of Claimant as para 5(a) to (d), are disallowed, being unjustified. 9.2The Counter Claim of the Respondent/UOI, as at para 6(a) above, for Rs.17,50,153/- towards cost of stores not supplied is allowed, in fav...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Vimlesh and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:17. h April, 2014 % + MAC.APP.No.1169/2011 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. .....Appellant Represented by: Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate. Versus VIMLESH & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The instant appeal is preferred against the award dated 24.09.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.11,58,200/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization of the amount.2. Mr.Kanwal Chaudhary, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company argued that the present case was of a head-on collision. Thus, while affixing the liability, the learned Tribunal ought to have assessed the contributory negligence on the part of the vehicle driven by the deceased.3. To support his submission, the learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to...
Tag this Judgment!Yunus Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:17. 04.2014 + YUNUS Through: CRL. A.1371of 2010 ..... Appellant Mr. Anupam Sharma, Adv. versus THE STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN ].JUDGEMENT V.K. JAIN, J.(Oral) On 6.1.2010 at about 10.15 pm, an information has been received that a boy had been stabbed in Gali No.10, Vishwas Nagar near graveyard. The information was recorded vie DD No.36A and a copy of the said DD was given to HC Charan Dass for investigation. When the aforesaid police official reached Gali No.10, Vishwas Nagar, no eye witness was found present there. In the meanwhile, he received information that the injured Raju had been brought to Hedgewar Hospital by his father Shri Shiv Prasad. Thereupon, the aforesaid police official reached Hedgewar Hospital, where the injured Raju was found admitted. In his statement to HC Charan Dass, injured Raju inter alia stated that on that date he, along with his fa...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Smt Ganga Devi and ors
Court: Delhi
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:17. h April, 2014 % + MAC.APP. No.169/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms. Sakshi Gupta, Adv. versus SMT GANGA DEVI & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms. Santha Devi Raman and Mr. V.K. Vashishth , Advs. for R1 to R7. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 14.11.2011, whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.8,38,700/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till realization of the amount.2. Ms. Sakshi Gupta, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the claimants have claimed that the deceased was working as a driver on the date of accident and was earning Rs.8,000/- per month. However, neither the avocation of the deceased nor his earning was proved by the claimants. Therefore, Ld. Tribunal has assessed hi...
Tag this Judgment!Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Gulabi Devi and ors
Court: Delhi
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:17. h April, 2014 % + MAC.APP. No.912/2011 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. versus GULABI DEVI & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Pankaj Kr. Sharma, Adv. for R1 to R4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 30.07.2011, whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.6,95,336/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition, i.e., 13.01.2010 till the notice under Order 21 Rule 1 CPC is issued by the respondents (before Tribunal) in favour of the petitioner (before Tribunal).2. Instant appeal has been filed mainly on the ground that the permit of the offending vehicle was not valid on the date of accident. Thus, there was breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. In such eventuality, Ld. Tribun...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Ahmed (Minor) Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7279/2013 MOHD. AHMED (MINOR) Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Advocate with Ms. Kusum Sharma, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through ..... Respondents Ms.Shyel Trehan, Amicus Curiae with Ms. Tejaswi Shetty, Mr. Nishant Gokhale and Ms. Himanie Katoch, Advocates. Ms. H.Hnunpuii, Advocate for UOI. Ms. Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel with Ms. Sana Ansari, Advocate for GNCT of Delhi. Mr. Mehmood Pracha, Advocate with Sumit Babbar, Advocate for AIIMS. Ms. Maneesha Dhir, Advocate for Ministry of Corporate Affairs. Reserved on :3. d April, 2014 Date of Decision :17. h April, 2014 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: Martin Luther King Junior said, "of all forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane". The present case many years later illustrates what he had said. ISSUE1 The issue that arises for consideration in the present petition is whether a minor child born...
Tag this Judgment!