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.
Vikram Vs. Lt.Governor of Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : January 16, 2015 + W.P.(Crl.) 1411/2014 VIKRAM ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Mir Akhtar Hussain, Advocate with Mr.Lakhi Singh, Advocate versus LT.GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Mukesh Gupta, ASC with SI Dinesh Dahiya, PS Sultanpuri PRATIBHA RANI, J.(Oral) 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of orders dated 30.10.2013 passed by respondent No.1 herein upholding the order dated 18.03.2013 passed by respondent No.2.2. The facts of the case are that the writ petitioner was served with a notice under Section 50 DP Act (Delhi Police Act). The petitioner not only failed to respond to the notice but also preferred not to participate in the externment proceedings despite notices being sent and served on the family members of the petitioner, as and when he was not found present at home.3. Finding no option but to cond...
Sudhir Kumar Jain Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No.456/2015 16th January , 2015 SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Harish Malhotra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sakesh Kumar, Adv. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. Narendra Kalra and Mr. Sumit Rajput, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, who was the Chairman and Managing Director of the Syndicate Bank, impugns the order dated 22.9.2014 by which the services of the petitioner have been terminated with immediate effect in exercise of powers under sub-clause (1A) of Clause 8 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme 1970/1980 (hereinafter referred to as the 1970 Scheme). This impugned order reads F.No.1/10/2012/VIG (Part-1) Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Financial Services New D...
Siya Ram Dwivedi Vs. New Holland Fiat India Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. 1505/2014 % Judgement reserved on:09. 12.2014 Judgement pronounced on:16. 01.2015 SIYA RAM DWIVEDI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Abdhesh Chaudhary and Ms Manisha Suri, Advs. versus NEW HOLLAND FIAT INDIA PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr Shambhu Sharan, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT1 Vide the present petition, the petitioner has assailed the Ex-parte Arbitral Award dated 2nd August, 2014.2. The Arbitrator was appointed in this case vide letter dated 18th November, 2013 as a Sole Arbitrator for adjudication of the dispute arising out of a Dealership Agreement.3. The respondents predecessor-in-interest M/s New Holland Tractors (India) (P) Ltd. (NHT for short) was engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of tractors and their spare parts. The NHT appointed M/s Rajinder Machinery Mart whose proprietor is the petitioner before me, its dealer by virtue of letter of intent dated 30.07.2002. Subsequently, a com...
Gurdeep Singh Vs. Punjab and Sindh Bank and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on 16th January, 2015 + W.P.(C) 4570/2014 GURDEEP SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Raman Duggal and Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Advs. versus PUNJAB & SINDH BANK & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Pallav Saxena, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. With consent to the parties, matter was heard for disposal. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by an order of Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) dated 14.07.2014 in Appeal No.5/2014 (DEL-II).2. The respondent (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) had initiated recovery proceedings under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 and filed an application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). The bank contended that the petitioner had deposited a sale deed dated 26.05.2003 and created an equitable WPC45702014 Page 1 mortga...
Shri M.L. Bansal Vs. Punjab National Bank and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.824/1999 16th January, 2015 % SHRI M.L. BANSAL Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Rohit Gandhi, Advocate, Mr. Varun Garg, Advocate with petitioner in person. VERSUS PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Jagat Arora, Advocate with Mr. Rajat Arora, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, the erstwhile employee of the respondent no.1/Punjab National Bank, impugning the enquiry officers report dated 30.12.1994 which holds the petitioner guilty with respect to various sub charges of the first charge in terms of Article of Charges dated 11.3.1994. Petitioner also impugns the report of the disciplinary authority dated 22.6.1995 imposing the major penalty of removal from services on the petitioner and which order of the disciplinary a...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Prem and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
$-3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:16. h January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 540/2012 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Pankaj Seth, Advocate versus PREM & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate for Respondents no.1 & 2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd. impugns the judgment dated 15.03.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby in a claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988(the Act), a compensation of Rs.6,84,500/- was awarded in favour of Respondents no.1 and 2 for the death of Sunil who died in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 21.08.2007.2. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that deceased Sunil had hired the motorcycle from Respondent no.3, owner of the motorcycle and thus, he stepped into the shoes of the owner. He being neither a third party nor an employee, ...
Dr. Minu Kashyap Vs. Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidya ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.7741/2014 & CM No.18217/14 % 16th January , 2015 DR. MINU KASHYAP Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Soumyajit Pani, Advocate. VERSUS SHRI LAL BAHADUR SHASTRI RASHTRIYA SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETH & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. B.S.Rajesh Agrajit, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Arunav Patnaik, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition is filed by one Dr. Minu Kashyap impugning the reports dated 8.8.2008 and 3.5.2011, issued by different committees constituted to look into the allegations of gender discrimination and harassment etc of the petitioner by the respondent no.2. At the outset, I put it to counsel for the petitioner that one writ petition challenging two totally separate enquiry reports separated by many years, and which have been made pursuant to two separate proceedings, cannot be challenged by one petition, inasmuch as, in such a case the pet...
Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Anjana Patial and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
$-10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:16. h January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 10/2014 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate versus ANJANA PATIAL & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. There is a twin challenge to the judgment dated 17.09.2013 passed in Petition No.1011/2010 whereby a compensation of Rs.47,17,300/- was awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) for the death of Anoop Singh who died in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 22.05.2010 at 3:25 p.m.2. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that there was negligence on the part of the deceased Anoop Singh himself or in any case, there was contributory negligence and therefore, the owner of the insured bus was not liable to pay compensation; consequently, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation. MAC APP102014 compensation awa...
Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Ram Manik and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:16. h January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 498/2013 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Adv. versus RAM MANIK AND ORS Through: ..... Respondents Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is for reduction of compensation of Rs.16,90,806/awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of Respondent no.1 for having suffered injuries to his right leg in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 02.05.2008 while Respondent no.1 was riding a cycle pursuing his vocation of selling cigarettes.2. At the time of hearing of the appeal, following contentions were raised by the learned counsel for the Appellant Insurance Company:(i) Respondent no.1 claimed compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- but as against this, he was awarded a compensation of Rs.16,90,806/-; (ii) Respondent no.1 claimed his income to be Rs.6,000/- to Rs.7,000/- from...
Ram Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
Special Bench $~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + REVIEW PETITION No.429/2014 IN W.P. (C) No.4536/2013 Date of decision:16. h January, 2015 RAM KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sudhir Nagar, Mr. Mohit Singh & Mr. Pujya Kumar, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS .... Respondent Through: Ms. Shruti Yadav, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): REVIEW PETITION No.429/2014 This is an application for review of the order dated 22nd July, 2013 passed by this Bench dismissing the writ petition filed by the applicant. For the sake of completeness, we are reproducing the order dated 22nd July, 2013, which reads as under:The order impugned in this writ petition, which is filed in the month of July, 2013, is dated 09.10.2012. The said order passed by the Joint Secretary to Govt. of India under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962. Thus there is a delay of nearly nine months in preferring the present wr...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »