Delhi Court July 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 15 of about 371 results (0.019 seconds)Parmanand Vs. Balram Bahri
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 396/2011 & C.M.No.6877/2011 (for stay) % JULY23 2014 PARMANAND ......Petitioner Through: Mr.Aly Mirza, Advocate. VERSUS BALRAM BAHRI Through: ...... Respondent Mr.P.K.Rawal, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By the impugned order dated 03.3.2011 while disallowing the amendment application filed by the respondent/defendant, the respondent/defendant was directed to file a subsequent pleading to incorporate subsequent events. The subsequent events pertain to the stand of the respondent/defendant that during the pendency of the suit, the possession of the suit property has been illegally taken away by three persons, namely Sh. Krishan Lal Dutta, Sh. Parveen Kumar and Sh. Bijender Kumar.2. In a suit for specific performance, issues which arise are as to the existence of agreement to sell, breach of contract and readiness and willingness of the plaintiff/pe...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Simran Vs. Shri Ramanand Gupta
Court: Delhi
9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC. REV. 53/2014 & CM16502014 23rd July , 2014 % SMT. SIMRAN Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate VERSUS SHRI RAMANAND GUPTA Through: ...... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This revision petition under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 impugns the judgment of the Additional Rent Controller dated 03.12.2013 by which the leave to defend application filed by the petitioner/tenant has been dismissed and an eviction order was passed with respect to the tenanted premises No.170, Sanjay Enclave, First Floor, LIG Flats, Jahangirpuri, Delhi.2. This case came up for admission for the first time about six months back on 28.1.2014, when on the request of the petitioner adjournment was granted for today. Today, once again, an adjournment was prayed on the ground that one counsel Mr. Bedi is not available, however, there is no ref...
Tag this Judgment!Majid Sheikh Mansoori Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 17, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: July 23, 2014 % + CRL.A. 969/2012 MAJID SHEIKH MANSOORI ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms.Arpan Wadhawan, Advocate for Ms.Manjusha, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Mahesh Kasana, ATO/Sangam Vihar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Majid Sheikh Mansoori has been held guilty for having murdered his wife Vidya. The learned Trial Judge has returned the verdict of guilt believing Azaruddin PW-7 and Shakil Mohammad PW-19 to be truthful eye witnesses. Recovery of knife Ex.P-1 pursuant to Majid Sheikh Mansooris disclosure statement which was opined by Dr.Raghvinder Kumar PW-4 as capable of causing the 17 stab wounds on Vidya is the other incriminating evidence relied upon. After holding Majid Sheikh Mansoori guilty for the offence of murder vide impugned...
Tag this Judgment!ishwar Devi Grover and ors. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + TEST.CAS. 83/2013 ISHWAR DEVI GROVER & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Sandeep P. Agarwal and Mr. Rajesh Pathak, Advocates versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Jayendra, Advocate % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER2307.2014 1. By this petition, probate is sought of WILL dated 04.03.2013 (Ex. PW1/1). The petitioners comprise of the wife and two sons, a daughter and grandson of the Testator, one Sh. Bhagwan Dass Grover. The wife is arrayed as petitioner no.1. The two sons are arrayed as petitioner nos.2 and 3, while the daughter and the grandson are impleaded as petitioner nos.4 and 5 respectively.2. The said WILL (Ex. PW1/1) bears the signatures of one Dr. Rajiv Dingra (PW-1). PW-1 who has testified that the testator executed the document, PW1/1 dated 04.03.2013 in his presence and the presence of the other attesting witness, that is, Smt. Ishwar Devi Grover, i.e., petitioner no.1. PW-1 has further deposed that the ...
Tag this Judgment!Dyal Singh College Vs. South Delhi Municipal Corporation and ors
Court: Delhi
46 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4521/2014 & CM APPL. 9001/2014 DYAL SINGH COLLEGE Through ..... Petitioner Mr. A.P.S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate versus SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Gaurang Kanth, Advocate for R-1 and 2. Mr. Malaya Kumar Chand, Advocate for R-3/L&DO. Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal and Mr. Ankur Chibber, Advocates for R-5/DU. % Date of Decision :23. d July, 2014 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. By way of the present writ petition, petitioner wants respondents No.1 and 2 to sanction and approve its Building Plans without linking the same with the issue of ownership of Sunheri Nallah which is now covered.2. Petitioner also challenges Town Planners Letter dated 28th May, 2014 wherein it is stated that the storm water drain (the whole portion of which is covered now) pertains to South Delhi Municipal Corporation. The South Delhi Municipal Corpora...
Tag this Judgment!Sanatan Dharam Mandir Sabha (Regd.) and ors. Vs. Subash Kapoor
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on: July 23, 2014 + CS(OS) No.2343/2011 SANATAN DHARAM MANDIR SABHA (REGD) & ORS. .... Plaintiffs Through Mr. Rajeev Aneja, Advocate versus SUBASH KAPOOR Through .....Defendant Defendant is ex-parte CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) 1. The plaintiffs have filed a suit for seeking relief of possession, mesne profits/damages and permanent injunction against the defendant in respect of property bearing House No.160, Nimri Colony, Phase-1 near Ashok Vihar Phase IV, Delhi- 110052 (hereinafter referred to as the suit property).2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 are the legatees/beneficiaries of the Will dated 10th July, 1998 made by Late Sh. Om Prakash Kapoor, who died on 8th February, 2000 and plaintiff No.4 is the executor of the said Will and as per the stipulation of the said Will, the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 together have inherited the movable and immovable properties of th...
Tag this Judgment!Nandan Singh Mahalwal and ors. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ...
Court: Delhi
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:23. 07.2014 + W.P.(C) 7257/2013 NANDAN SINGH MAHALWAL AND ORS...... Petitioners Through: Sh. B.C. Pandey, Advocate. versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. R.V. Sinha, Sh. R.N. Singh and Sh. A.S. Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 01.11.2012 in O.A. 2136/2011.2. The CAT upheld the denial of the claim for stepping-up of pay scale under Fundamental Rule-22(I)(a) [hereafter referred to as FR22(I)(a)]..3. The brief facts are that the petitioner is the legal representative of late Ms. Prem Mahalwal. She was initially appointed as an W.P.(C) 7257/2013 Page 1 Assistant Teacher in the year 1965 in Gandhi Harijan Vidyalaya, Madangir Camp, an aided school. Her services were transferred to the Municipal Corp...
Tag this Judgment!ShahIn Rustam and anr Vs. Indira Gandhi National Open University and o ...
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 4512/2014 & CM APPL.8986-88/2014 Decided on :23. 07.2014 IN THE MATTER OF SHAHIN RUSTAM AND ANR ..... Petitioners Through Mr.Sanjay Sharawat and Mr.Ankit Gyan and Mr.Ratish Kumar, Advocates versus INDIRA GANDHI NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr.Aly Mirza, Advocate for R-1/IGNOU Mr.R.N.Singh & A.S.Singh, Advocates for R-5/SDMC Ms.Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel with Ms.Sana Ansari, Advocate for R-6/DSSSB Mr.Hemant Gupta and Mr.Atul Jain, Advocates for R-7/UOI CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners praying inter alia that the decision taken by the respondent No.3/NCTE, in terms of the letter dated 11.2.2014 (Annexure P-10), holding inter alia that the respondent No.2/MANUU has not been granted recognition for conducting DPE Course under Distance Mode, be quashed. Further, the petitioners seek a declaration to the effect that the course...
Tag this Judgment!Kvtek Power Systems Private Limited Vs. ........
Court: Delhi
$~6 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CO.PET. 245 /2014 KVTEK POWER SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashish Middha, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Atma Sah, Assistant Registrar of Companies for the Regional Director Mr. Rajiv Behl, Advocate for the Official Liquidator. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER23.07.2014 % SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) 1. This second motion joint Petition has been filed under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) seeking sanction to the Scheme of Amalgamation (Scheme) of KVTEK Power System Private Limited (Transferor Company) with ETM Technologies Private Limited (Transferee Company)(Collectively referred as the Petitioner Companies). A copy of the Scheme has been enclosed with the petition. ================================================ CO. PET. 245/2014 1 2. The registered offices of all the Petitioner Companies are situated at New Delhi, within the jurisdiction of this Court.3. The details of res...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Indian Institute of Planning and Management and a Vs. M/S DeseIn P ...
Court: Delhi
$~50 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. 785/2014 Date of decision:23. d July, 2014 % M/S INDIAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNING & MANAGEMENT & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Raman Kapur, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Gursharan Singh, Adv. versus M/S DESEIN PVT LTD. Through: ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT (ORAL) I.A.No.13361/2014 (for exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Application is disposed of. O.M.P. 785/2014 1. The present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act has been filed challenging the interim award dated 6.1.2014.2. It is submitted that the learned arbitrator has erred in allowing the application of the respondent under Order 12 Rule 6 of CPC. It is submitted that the impugned award dated 6.1.2014 is wrong, illegal, contrary to law and against the terms of the contract and against the public policy of India and deserves to be set aside. It is further submitted that the learned sole arbitrator h...
Tag this Judgment!