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.
Tata Aig General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Akansha and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
$-12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:15. h January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 719/2012 TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Through: ..... Appellant Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate versus AKANSHA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. A.K. Mishra, Advocate for Respondent no.3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is directed against a judgment dated 21.04.2012 whereby a compensation of Rs.1,07,000/- was awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of Respondent no.1 for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 04.05.2009.2. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the Appellant presses the appeal only to the extent of seeking recovery rights against the insured. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that it was amply proved that the driver did not possess a valid driving licence at the time of the accident and, that is why, he was also challaned for...
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Barkha Sharma and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:15. h January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 229/2013 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Adv. versus BARKHA SHARMA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Deepa Rai, Adv. for R-1 to R-6. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appellant Reliance General Insurance Company Limited impugns the judgment dated 11.12.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) and seeks reduction of the compensation of Rs.50,80,000/- which was awarded to Respondents no.1 to 6 for the death of Gulshan Sharma, who succumbed to the fatal injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 10.11.2010 at about 10:50 p.m. at M.B. Road, Near K.S.S. Rang Road, New Delhi.2. There is twin challenge to the impugned judgment. First, that the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle was not established and second, the compensation awarded is exorbitant a...
Enfield Infrastructure Limited Vs. Ntpc Vidyut Vyapar Ltd. and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI O.M.P. 322/2013 ENFIELD INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Kavita Jha and Ms. Shraddha, Advocates. versus NTPC VIDYUT VYAPAR LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Bharat Sangal with Ms. Anasuya Choudhury and Ms. Saggar Malhotra, Advocates for Respondent No.1. Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate for Respondent No.4. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER1501.2015 1. This petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) by Enfield Infrastructure Limited (EIL) seeks interim relief in respect of a bank guarantee for Rs.5,07,54,000 and two bank guarantees for Rs.10,15,08,000 each against Respondent No.1 NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Ltd. (NVVL) furnished by EIL to NVVL.2. EIL and NVVL entered into a power purchase agreement (PPA) on 25th January 2012. Pursuant thereto the aforementioned three bank guarantees were furnished by EIL to NVVL. In terms of the PPA, EIL was required to commission the Solar PV Project of 10MW capac...
Union of India Vs. M/S Chl Limited and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :15. 01.2015 + W.P.(C) 4412/2014, C.M. NO.8829/2014 UNION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. Satish Aggarwal, Advocate. versus M/S. CHL LIMITED & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Ravi Kant Chadha, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Mansi Chadha, Advocate, for Respondent No.1. Sh. Prashanto Chandra Sen and Ms. Anushruti, Advocate, for Respondent No.4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The present petition preferred by the Union of India (UOI) through the Customs Department seeks to question an order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) dated 01.04.2014 in Appeal No.403/2010. It was urged that the decision of the DRAT, leaving it to the concerned adjudicating authority to decide whether or not the third respondent (hereafter referred to as the auction purchaser) is under a contractual duty or liability to pay the customs dues, is erroneo...
M/S Dev Infrastructures Pvt Ltd and Others Vs. M/S Jainco Developers P ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 3268/2012 Decided on :15. 01.2015 IN THE MATTER OF: M/S DEV INFRASTRUCTURES PVT LTD & OTHERS ..... Plaintiffs Through : Mr. Dhananjay Shahi, Advocate versus M/S JAINCO DEVELOPERS PVT LTD & OTHRS ..... Defendants Through : Mr. Dinesh Kr. Gupta with Mr. Viditi Gupta, Advocates CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) I.A.No.8280/2013 (by D-3) and I.A.No.8281/2013 (by D-1) both u/O R-I R-10 CPC for deletion of their name from the array of defendants) 1. The present applications have been filed by the defendants No.1 & 3, praying inter alia for deletion of their names from the array of defendants on the ground of mis-joinder of parties.2. The plaintiffs have instituted the present suit against three defendants for recovery of a sum of `97,20,000/- with interest, on a joint and several basis. It is the case of the plaintiffs/companies that Shri Praveen Kumar Jain, Director of the defendants No.1 & 2/Company had approached th...
v.K.Pandey Vs. Uoi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : January 08, 2015 Judgment Pronounced on : January 14, 2015 + W.P.(C) 2679/2013 V.K.PANDEY Represented by: .....Petitioner Ms.Priyanka M.Bhardwaj, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. Represented by: .....Respondents Mr.Ankur Chhibber, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the memorandum of charge dated November 28, 2007, issued by the Directorate General, CRPF to the petitioner as also the order dated September 13, 2012, passed by the DIGP (CR & Vigilance), CRPF inflicting the penalty of reduction of pay by two stages for a period of three years with further directions that no increment would be earned by the petitioner during the period of reduction and that the reduction would have the effect of postponing the future increments.2. The petitioner was appointed to the post of Sub-Inspector in CRPF and earned promo...
Santosh Devi Vs. Ombir Singh and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-2015
5# $ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % C.R.P. 78/2014 Decided on:14. h January, 2015 SANTOSH DEVI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Ankit, Advocate. versus OMBIR SINGH & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Prem Chand Ganganiya, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J (ORAL) CM No.9777/2014 (Delay in filing) For the reasons stated in the application the delay of 89 days in filing the petition is condoned. Application is disposed of. C.R.P. 78/2014 and CM Nos. 9776/2014 (Stay) 1. The Petitioner impugns the order dated 29th November, 2013 whereby the suit filed by her under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (in short the SP Act) has been dismissed.2. The Petitioner/Plaintiff filed a suit claiming that she was the landlady of House No.326-B, Village Karkardooma, Shahdara, Delhi-92 and residing in the said premises along with her family for the last 30 years. It is stated that the Defendants/Respondents herein who are the husband and wife forcibly and...
Harpreet Singh Vs. State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi) and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:9. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:14thJanuary, 2015 + CRL. M.C. 4958/2014 HARPREET SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Maninder Singh, Mr. Serman Rawat, Ms. Aekta Vats, Mr. Jagmeet Kandhawa & Mr. Dinhar Takiar, Advocates. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Shiv Sapra & Ms. Amoha Sharma, Advocates for R-2. Mr. Karan Singh, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH JUDGMENT1 By way of these petitions filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), the petitioner assails order dated 26.09.2014 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate-02 (South), Saket Courts, New Delhi.2. The concise facts of the case are that respondent No.2/complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as NI Act) against the petitioner (accused in original complaint) for the offence under Section ...
Foundation for Applied Research in Cancer Vs. Dda and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: January 14, 2015 + W.P.(C) No.4195/2013 FOUNDATION FOR APPLIED RESEARCH IN CANCER ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Khanna, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vinod Kumar, Ms. Shefali Jain and Mr. Anirudh Tanwar, Advocates. Versus DDA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Arun Birbal and Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocates for Respondent No.1/DDA. Ms.Mini Pushkarna, Standing Counsel and Ms.Yoothica Pallavi, Advocate for Respondent No.2/SDMC. Ms.Ferida Satarawala, Advocate for Respondent No.4/GNCTD. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. The petitioner is a Cancer Research Institute, registered as a Trust and enjoying a tax exemption under Section 80-G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent No.1/Delhi Development Authority (for short DDA) vide para 6(g) of the Notifications dated 10.10.2008 and 23.12.2008 levied additional Floor Area Ratio (FAR) charges for institutional plots, i.e., includin...
Shri Christopher Daruwala Vs. Smt. Leena Baretto
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-2015
10# $ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 743/2014 & CM129462014 (stay) Decided on:14. h January, 2015 % SHRI CHRISTOPHER DARUWALA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Prosenjeet Banerjee with Ms. Princy Ponnan, Advs. versus SMT. LEENA BARETTO Through: ..... Respondent None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J (ORAL) 1. Despite pass over none is present on behalf of the respondent. Even on the last date despite pass over none was present on the respondent. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the paper book.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 10 th February, 2014 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge-cum-Rent Controller whereby the order of the learned Civil Judge dated 13th November, 2013 was reversed. Learned Civil Judge vide order dated 13th November, 2013 had allowed the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed by the petitioner/defendant in Suit No.923/2013 thereby rejecting the plaint.3. A brief background of fac...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »