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.
Yuthika Commercial Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Religare Finvest Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ARB.P. 627/2014 & IA No.25041 of 2014 (for stay) PRANIDHI COMMERCE PVT LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anil Airi, Mr. Kamal Budhiraja and Ms. Shruti Agrawal, Advocates. versus RELIGARE FINVEST LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Puri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ruchin Midha, Advocate. With ARB.P. 628/2014 & IA No.25049 of 2014 (for stay) KALYANI BARTER PVT LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anil Airi, Mr. Kamal Budhiraja and Ms. Shruti Agrawal, Advocates. versus RELIGARE FINVEST LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Puri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ruchin Midha, Advocate. With ARB.P. 629/2014 & IA No.25055 of 2014 (for stay) YUTHIKA COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anil Airi, Mr. Kamal Budhiraja and Ms. Shruti Agrawal, Advocates. versus RELIGARE FINVEST LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Puri,...
Unity Pratibha Consortium Vs. Airport Authority of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ARB.P. 303/2014 UNITY PRATIBHA CONSORTIUM ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Kailash Vasdev, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.S. Ray, Ms. Rakhi Ray and Mr. Vaibhav Gulia, Advocates. versus AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Digvijay Rai, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER2101.2015 1. This is a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising out of an Agreement dated 2nd December 2006 between them whereby the Petitioner was awarded a contract to carry out the work of Modular Expansion of Terminal Building at Amritsar Airport, Amritsar (Phase-II) SH: Main Building Work. The initial tender cost of the contract was Rs. 65,58,82,344.95p.2. It is stated that the start date of the contract was 19th December 2006. Although the stipulated date of completion was 18th October 2007, the actual date of compl...
Mrs. Vineeta Tejpal Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.2750/2014 21st January, 2015 % MRS. VINEETA TEJPAL Through: ......Petitioner Mr. A. Maitri, Adv. with Ms. Radhika Chandrashekhar, Adv. Mr. Ajay Tejpal, in person. VERSUS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Ms. Nikita Khetrapal, Adv. for Ms. Nidhi Raman, Adv. for R-1 and 2. Mr. Raj Kumar Sherawat, Adv. for R4. Mr. Vibhu Shankar, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) W.P.(C) No.2750/2014 & CM No.15447/2014 (for amendment of the writ petition) & CM No.8543/14 (for vacation of stay) & CM No.5711/2014 (stay) 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed by the petitioner originally impugning the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) dated 7.4.2014 which recommended promotion of the respondent no.4/Ms. Poonam Kaushik to the post of Post Graduate Teacher-PGT (Maths) with the respo...
Predeep Kumar Verma Vs. Aparna Mehra and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision:21. 01.2015 % CRL.L.P. 102/2014 PREDEEP KUMAR VERMA ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Anjana Prabhakar, Mr. Naroj Kumar Sahu, Advocates along with petitioner in person. versus APARNA MEHRA & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Samrat Nigam, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present leave to appeal has been preferred under Section 378(4) Cr PC in respect of the judgment dated 03.12.2013 passed by Ms. Pooja Talwar, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, NI ACT02South, Saket Courts, New Delhi in CC No.827/2010 in Pradeep Kumar Verma v. Aparna Mehra, by which the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the Act).2. The case of the petitioner/complainant was that he had advanced a friendly loan of Rs.2,24,800/- in cash to the accused. The cheque in question bearing no.383933 dated 24.08.2005 drawn on HDFC Bank had been issued ...
Shatruhan Lal Vs. Union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. t January, 2015 % + W.P.(C) No.585/2015 SHATRUHAN LAL .. Petitioner Through: Mr. Anand Mishra and Mr. Amrendra K. Singh, Advs. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .. Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, Adv for R-1. Mr. Kamal Mehta, Adv for R-3. Mr. Dipak Nag and Ms. Alka Chojar, Advs for R-2 Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr.Amit Mahajan, CGSC and Ms. Shriya Singh, Adv for UOI. CORAM:HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, filed as a Public Interest Litigation seeks reliefs of (i) setting aside of the order dated 17th July, 2014 of the respondent No.2 Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA); (ii) direction to the respondent No.2 IRDA to frame suitable guidelines in the matter; (iii) issuance of a writ declaring Section 113 of the Insurance Act, 1938 as ultra vires the Constitution of India; (iv) issuance of a direction t...
the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pooja and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:21. t January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 353/ 2013 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Through : ..... Appellant Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Adv. versus POOJA & ORS. Through : ..... Respondents Mr. Kailash Chandra, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL G.P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The only ground of challenge led in the instant appeal is with regard to the quantum of compensation.2. It is urged by the learned counsel for the appellant that there was no evidence with regard to future prospects and hence, addition of 30% towards future prospects ought not to have been granted.3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for Respondents no.1 to 3 supports the impugned judgment and submits that the compensation awarded is just and reasonable.4. It is urged that compensation awarded towards non-pecuniary damages is on the lower side. The question of grant of future prospects was dealt with at great length by this Court in Mac. App. No.189/2014 titled...
Sunny Aggarwal Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:21. 01.2015 W.P.(C) 629/2015 ... Petitioner SUNNY AGGARWAL versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr Mr S. C. Singhal : Mr Rajat Navet CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) CM10832015 Allowed subject to all just exceptions. WP(C) 629/2015 & CM10842015 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner, who is a transporter and has one tank truck registered in U.P, has sought, inter alia, the following prayer:- thereafter by issuance of appropriate writs or directions the Respondent be directed to consider the vehicles of the States as mentioned in the tender in preference to the tenders quoted for the vehicles having the registration number of other States and thereafter they be further directed not to issue letter of intent to such tenders who have quoted the vehicles of...
M/S. Swastik Plastics Vs. M/S.Sipchem Marketing Company (Smc).....
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. 01.2015 + CS(OS) 157/2015 M/s. SWASTIK PLASTICS Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Girish Aggarwal and Mr.Vaibhav Jain, Advs. versus M/S.SIPCHEM MARKETING COMPANY (SMC)..... Defendant Through Mr.Navin Chawla, Mr.Rajeev M.Roy, Mr.Ketan Paul and Mr.Anurup Narula Advs. for D-1 and D-2 Mr.Aditya Madan, Adv. for D-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) IA No.1200/2015 1. This is an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC seeking to restrain defendant No.3 from making any payment to defendant No.1 under LC No.4979 0NI00034714 which is for USD243,540=00 that is about Rs.1,51,00,000/- till the disposal of the present suit.2. As per the accompanying plaint the plaintiff is in the business of plastic granules. It is stated that the plaintiff contacted defendant No.2 who introduced the plaintiff to defendant No.1 which is based in Saudi Arabia and is a manufacturer of plastic granules. The plaintiff gave an orde...
Ajay Kumar Vs. Staff Selection Commission, Through Its Regional D
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of hearing & Order: January 21, 2015. + W.P.(C) 608/2015 AJAY KUMAR Through: .... Petitioner Mr. R. K. Saini, Mr. Avadh Kaushik & Mr. Lokesh Sharma, Advocates versus STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION, THROUGH ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR (NORTH REGION) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Bhagwan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Ms. Smriti Sharma, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(ORAL) CM APPL No.1052/2015 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 608/2015 & CM No.1053/2015 (Stay) 1. This is a Writ Petition by the petitioner calling in question the tenability of the order dated 30.09.2014 whereby the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principle Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the CAT) dismissed the Original Application (in short OA) filed by him.2. In brief, the facts of the case are that the petitioner belongs to the OBC ...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Geeta Devi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:21. t January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 988/2012 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Through : ..... Appellant Mr. Shoumik Mazumdar and Mr.Pankaj Seth, Advs. versus GEETA DEVI AND ORS. Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL ..... Respondents G.P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The appellant National Insurance Company Limited impugns the judgment dated 02.06.2012 passed by the Claims Tribunal whereby a compensation of Rs.18,02,342/- was awarded in favour of Respondents No.1 to 6 for the death of Lala Ram who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 07.09.2011 at 5.03 pm.2. At the time of hearing the appeal, the following contentions are raised by the learned counsel for the appellant:(i) the proof of income of Rs.10,000/- per month was disbelieved by the Claims Tribunal yet the Claims Tribunal took the income of the deceased as Rs.8500/- per month without any material in this regard; (ii) Since it was not proved that the deceased had...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »