Delhi Court May 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 29 of about 438 results (0.022 seconds)Ravinder Chauhan Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
$-R7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :15. h MAY, 2014 + CRL.A.No.201/2011 RAVINDER CHAUHAN Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Pankaj Tripathi, Advocate along with appellant in person. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through : ..... Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. The appellant was convicted by a judgment dated 09.12.2010 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.51/10 arising out of FIR No.52/10 PS M.S.Park for committing offences under Sections 367/377 IPC. By an order dated 10.12.2010, the appellant was awarded RI for three years with fine ` 3,000/- under Section 367 IPC and RI for five years with fine ` 4,000/- under Section 377 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.2. Appellants counsel on instructions has stated that the appellant has opted not to pursue the appeal as he has come out of the jail after completing the sentence awarded. To this, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has n...
Tag this Judgment!Dinesh Kumar Vs. Uoi and anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: May 05, 2014 Judgment Pronounced on: May 15, 2014 + W.P.(C) 6856/2000 DINESH KUMAR Represented by: ..... Petitioner Col.N.L.Bareja, Advocate with Mr.S.R.Sharma, Advocate versus UOI & ANR. Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Richa Kapoor, Advocate with Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT NATH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The petitioner was enrolled as a Constable in BSF in the year 1987.2. It is the claim of the respondents/department that the petitioner had committed series of misconducts between the period from December 06, 1999 to May 10, 2000, the details of which are as under:S. No.1. Date and Incident Time of 06.12.1999 to 13.03.2000 W.P.(C) No.6856/2000 Particulars of Incident Petitioner was granted CL for 10 days from 15.11.1999 to 05.12.1999. On expiry of period of leave the petitioner did not join duty and reported on 13.03.2000 after remaining absent 2. ...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Kamla and ors
Court: Delhi
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:15th May, 2014 % + MAC.APP.434/2012 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. R.C. Mahajan, Advocate. Versus KAMLA & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.C.R.Jagar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP.434/2012 1. Vide the present appeal, the appellant/Insurance Company has assailed the award dated 02.02.2012, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation for an amount of Rs.11,58,728/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% 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 argued that the claimants have failed to establish that deceased Dharambir Singh was not in a permanent employment, despite, the learned Tribunal has added 30% in his actual income towards future prospects.3. Learned counsel further submitted that...
Tag this Judgment!inderjeet Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : April 04, 2014 DECIDED ON : May 15, 2014 + CRL.A. 158/2011 INDERJEET ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Devi Sahai, Advocate. Versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The appellant-Inderjeet challenges the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 20.01.2011 of learned Addl.Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.4/08 arising out of FIR No.288/04 registered at Police Station S.P.Badli by which he was held guilty under Section 308 IPC. By an order dated 25.01.2011, he was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three and a half years.2. Allegations against the appellant, as reflected in the charge- sheet, were that on 25.05.2004 at about 08.45 pm, at Main Road, Near Mandir, Sector-18, Rohini, Delhi, he inflicted injuries to Rajender Singh by sariya in an attempt to commit culpable homicide. Daily Diary No.27-A (Ex.PW-1/A) was recorded at 09.45 pm at Police Station S.P.Bad...
Tag this Judgment!Lal Chand Vs. Prem and ors
Court: Delhi
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:15. h May, 2014 + MAC.APP. No.778/2012 LAL CHAND ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. N.K. Jha, Adv. Versus PREM AND ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. D.D. Singh and Mr. Navdeep Singh, Advs. 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 31.03.2012, whereby, Ld. Tribunal awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.5,25,685/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till realization of the amount.2. Vide the present appeal, appellant is seeking enhancement of the compensation noted above.3. Mr. N.K. Jha, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellant is a self-employed person and was earning Rs.7,000/- per month. Since he failed to prove his avocation and salary, Ld. Tribunal assessed his monthly income at Rs.5,278/- as per the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 appl...
Tag this Judgment!Hdfc Standard Life Insurance Company Limited and anr Vs. Pension Fund ...
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:15. 05.2014 W.P.(C) 2516/2014 & CM52222014 HDFC STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ANR. ... Petitioners versus PENSION FUND AUTHORITY REGULATORY AND DEVELOPMENT ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners For the Respondent : Mr Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Adv. With Ms Bindi Dave, Ms Ankita Godbole, Advs. : Mr Bharat Sangal, Adv. with Ms I. Abenla Aier, Adv. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the letter dated 21.04.2014 issued by the Pension Fund Regulatory & Development Authority (PFRDA) whereby their commercial bid was not considered inasmuch as according to the PFRDA the petitioner No.1 did not satisfy the eligibility criteria regarding profits after providing for depreciation, interest and tax in all the immediately preceding three (3) years. The exact expression used by the PFRDA ...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Kumar and ors. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~3 & 4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: May 15, 2014 + FAO(OS) 465/2013 BHARAT KUMAR & ORS Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Sunil Magon, Advocate versus STATE & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Peeyoosh Kalra, Mr.Rakesh Kumar Garg and Mr.Anirban Sen, Advocates RFA(OS) 123/2013 BHARAT KUMAR Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Sunil Magon, Advocate versus ASHOK SAHDEV AND ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Peeyoosh Kalra, Mr.Rakesh Kumar Garg and Mr.Anirban Sen, Advocates for R-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(ORAL) Caveat No.839/2013 in RFA (OS) No.123/2013 Since counsel as above appears for the caveator, the caveat is discharged. CM No.14953/2013 in RFA (OS) No.123/2013 Allowed subject to just exceptions. FAO (OS) No.465/2013 & RFA (OS) No.123/2013 1. The appellant Bharat Kumar has been...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Ge Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Jaswant Singh and or ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.333/2012 15th May, 2014 % M/S GE MONEY FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Suman Tripathy, Advocate. Versus MR. JASWANT SINGH & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) + FAO No.333/2012 and C.M. Nos.13516/2012 (stay) & 13517/2012 (condonation of delay of 326 days) 1. This application being C.M. No.13517/2012 is filed seeking condonation of delay of 326 days in filing of the present appeal against the impugned judgment of the court below dated 31.5.2011 by which the objections of the appellant under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) have been dismissed as barred by time.2. Even after the objections were dismissed as time barred, the appellant is no wiser, because even this appeal is filed with a delay of 326 days. The reasons for seeking condonation of d...
Tag this Judgment!Rajdhani Industrial Corporation and anr. Vs. Vinod Kumar Kalra
Court: Delhi
* + % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RSA182013 & RSA492013 15th May, 2014 RSA182013 RAJDHANI INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION & ANR. ......Appellants Through: Mr. Pawan Uppadhaya, Mr. Rajesh Chhetri and Ms. Meenakshi Rawat, Advocates. VERSUS VINOD KUMAR KALRA Through: + ...... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Adv. RSA492013 RAJDHANI INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION & ANR. Through: ......Appellants Mr. Pawan Uppadhaya, Mr. Rajesh Chhetri and Ms. Meenakshi Rawat, Advocates. VERSUS VINOD KUMAR KALRA Through: ...... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) RSA182013 1. This second appeal is filed under Section 100 CPC impugning the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 22.12.2011 and the first appellate court dated 1.11.2012; by which the suit for recovery of possession and damages of the respondent-plaintiff has been decreed. The only issue which is argued before this Court...
Tag this Judgment!Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shri Gurmail Singh @ Gurm ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.330/2012 and C.M. No.13321/2012 (stay) 15th May, 2014 % BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Advocate. Versus SHRI GURMAIL SINGH @ GURMER @ GURNAL SINGH AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Pratima N. Chauhan, Advocate for respondent No.1. 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 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the insurance company impugning the judgment of the Commissioner dated 14.5.2012 by which compensation has been awarded to the respondent no.1 herein.2. The appellant/insurance company argues before this Court the aspect that the insurance company could not be liable in the absence of the respondent no.1/driver not having filed and proved his driving licence, and which defence was specifically taken by the insurance c...
Tag this Judgment!