Delhi Court January 2015 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.
Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Shree Krishan @ Pappu and O ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
$-44 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:27. h January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 87/2015 SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Meenakshi Midha, Adv. versus SHREE KRISHAN @ PAPPU & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CM.APPL.1403/2015(Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. MAC.APP. 87/2015 and CM APPL.1402/2015 (stay) 1. There is twin challenge to the judgment dated 30.10.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal). First, the driving licence of the driver of the offending vehicle had not been produced but in spite of this, Insurance Company was made liable to pay the compensation and second, the future prospects of 25% were granted erroneously.2. The law is well settled that even if there is conscious and willful breach of the terms and conditions of the policy, the Insurance Company will discharge its...
Rajindra Kumar Vs. Punjab National Bank and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No.2355/2014 27th January, 2015 RAJINDRA KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashok Bhalla, Adv. versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Rajesh Kumar and Mr. Gaurav Kumar Singh, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner impugns the order/letter of the respondent no.1-employer dated 1.5.2013 whereby the petitioner has been held not to be successful in the promotion process for the years 2012-2013 under which promotion had been claimed by the petitioner from Medium Management Grade(MMG) Scale-III to Senior Management Grade (SMG) Scale-IV.2. The admitted facts are that petitioner had succeeded in the earlier round of litigation when the first W.P.(C) No.2888/2012 was allowed by a learned Single Judge of this Court vide its judgment dated 8.1.2013 to th...
Luv Malhotra and Anr Vs. Union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:27. 01.2015 W.P.(C) 8617/2014 and CM No.19861/2014 .... Petitioners LUV MALHOTRA & ANR versus .... Respondents UNION OF INDIA & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners For the Respondent No.1 For the Respondent No.2 For the Respondent No.3 : Dr Vikrant Narayan Vasudeva with Mr Pratap Paliwal : Mr Dev P. Bhardwaj : Mr Yeeshu Jain, Ms Jyoti Tagi, Mr Siddharth Panda, Mr Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Mr Sunil Kumar Jha : Mr Arjun Pant, Mr Dhanesh Relan and Mr Arush Bhandari CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.2 is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioners does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit as the necessary averments are contained in the writ petition itself.2. The petitioners seek the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and T...
Dr. Rajendra Kumar and Ors Vs. The Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of hearing & Order: January 27, 2015. + CM APPL. No.427/2015 In W.P.(C) 14097-100/2005 DR. RAJENDRA KUMAR & ORS. .... Petitioners Through: Ms. Usha Mann & Ms. Vijayata M. Bhalla, Advocates versus THE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(ORAL) CM APPL. No.428/2015 (Condonation of Delay) By this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 151 CPC, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 20 days in re-filing the application. For the reason stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 20 days in re-filing the application is condoned. Application stands disposed of. CM APPL. No.427/2015 in W.P.(C) 14097-100/2005 By this application filed under Articles 215 & 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 C.P.C., the applicant seeks to recall and amend the order dated 11.10.200...
Sardar Satwant Singh Vs. Lakh Raj Sehgal and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 155/2012 & CM39952013 Decided on:27. h January, 2015 % SARDAR SATWANT SINGH ..... Petitioner Through Mr. R.S. Juneja, Adv. for Mr. S.Satwant Singh, Adv. versus LAKH RAJ SEHGAL & ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr. S.K. Sharma, Adv. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. Since 23rd January, 2015 was declared holiday, the matter is taken up today.2. Aggrieved by the order dated 1st February, 2012 passed by the learned ARC dismissing the application for leave to defend filed by the petitioner in an eviction petition filed by the respondents under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act, the petitioner prefers the present petition.3. In the eviction petition, the respondents stated that the father of the respondents Shri Ram Lal Sehgal was the owner of property No.H-13, Bhagat Singh Road, Chander Nagar, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the suit premises). He let out one shop measuring 15 feet x 7 feet 6 inches in the year 1...
State Vs. Sunil Kumar @ Sagar @ Rahul and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL LEAVE PETITION No.8/2013 % Date of decision :27. h January, 2015 STATE . APPELLANT Through : Mr. Firoz Khan Ghazi, APP for the State Versus SUNIL KUMAR @ SAGAR @ RAHUL & ORS. .RESPONDENTS Through : Ms. Jyoti Batra, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G. S. SISTANI HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL JUDGMENT (ORAL) Crl.M.A.No.76/2013 1. This is an application filed by the petitioner/State seeking condonation of 201 days delay in filing the present leave to appeal. Heard. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in filing the present leave to appeal is condoned.2. Application stands disposed of. Crl.L.P. 8/2013 3. By the present criminal leave petition filed under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the State seeks leave to appeal against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) in Sessions case No.4/2009, on the ground tha...
Raj Hans Towers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-V
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + DECIDED ON:27. 01.2015 ITA242015 C.M. No.621/2015 RAJ HANS TOWERS PVT. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.P. Garg, Advocate. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. Since 23.01.2015 was declared holiday, this matter is being taken up today, i.e., 27.01.2015.2. The assessee in this appeal under Section 260A urges that the impugned order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereafter referred to as ITAT) requires interference. It is aggrieved by an order of the ITAT dated 12.06.2014 in ITA Nos.4922/del/2011 and 4257/Del/2011. The question of law sought to be urged is whether, in the circumstances, the addition of Rs.63,33,260/- is legally sustainable.3. The assessee engaged itself in real estate and constructions activities. It was subjected to survey operation under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act...
Virendra Singh Khaira Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of hearing and order:27. h January 2015 + W.P.(C) 118/2015 VIRENDRA SINGH KHAIRA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Girish C. Jha, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Vivek Goyal, CGSC for respondent No.1. Ms. Tanu Priya Gupta, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA ORDER % 27.01.2015 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(ORAL) The case is taken up today as 23rd January 2015 was declared as holiday for this Court. C.M. Appl. No.181/2015 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. W.P. (C) No.118/2015 1. By this petition filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order to modify the order dated 15.2.2012 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the CAT) in O...
Pawan Sagar Jain Vs. Union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
$~49 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:27. 01.2015 W.P.(C) 7487/2014 and CM No.17725/2014 .... Petitioner PAWAN SAGAR JAIN versus .... Respondents UNION OF INDIA & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners For the Respondents : : Dr Vikrant Narayan Vasudeva with Mr R. Satish Kumar, Advocates. Mr Amit Mahajan, CGSC for UOI with Mr Siddhartha Das, Advocate. Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tagi, Advocates for L&B and LAC. : Mr Arjun Pant, Advocate for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.2 is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit as the necessary averments are contained in the writ petition itself.2. The petitioner seeks the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and ...
Narender Kumar Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
$~45 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:27. 01.2015 W.P.(C) 6992/2014 & CM164222014 NARENDER KUMAR ... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Amit Gupta with Ms Sumati Jumrani, Advocates. For the Respondents :Mr Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr Vinod Kumar Tiwari, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr Siddharth Panda, Advocates for LAB/LAC. Mr Pawan Mathur with Mr Himanshu Gupta, Advocates for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. Mr Siddharth Panda, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has handed over the affidavit on behalf of Land Acquisition Collector (South). The same is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit inasmuch as all the necessary averments are contained in the writ petition.2. By way of this writ petition the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »