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.
Montreaux Resorts P. Ltd and Ors. Vs. Sonia Khosla and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order reserved on:17. th November, 2014 Order pronounced on:13. h January, 2015 CONT. CAS (C) 165/2008 MONTREAUX RESORTS P. LTD & ORS....PETITIONERS Through: Mr. Raman Kapur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anand M. Mishra, Advocate Versus SONIA KHOSLA & ORS. ....RESPONDENTS Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.1. Little did the framing fathers of the Constitution and the legislators visualize that the privilege and liberty granted to an individual to approach the court of law and to appear for himself and for others either as an attorney or as an advocate could and would be misused and abused to such an extent as has been done by this one individual Mr. Deepak Khosla.2. 32 learned Judges of this High Court (including former and sitting judges), judges of the subordinate courts, the Company Law Board and the Arbitral Tribunal comprising of former judges of this Court and a former judge of the Supreme Court have recu...
Santosh Sindal Vs. School Management of Daya Nand School and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No.286/2015 13th January, 2015 SANTOSH SINDAL Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Raj Kumar Sherawat, Adv. and Mr. Naresh Kr. Sharma, VERSUS SCHOOL MANAGEMENT OF DAYA NAND SCHOOL & ANR. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Yogesh Saini and Mr. Kartik Jindal, Advocates. 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 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, who was a teacher with the respondent no.1-school, impugns the order of the Delhi School Tribunal dated 11.11.2014 which has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner in which the petitioner had challenged the order of the school dated 31.7.2013 terminating her services.2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was employed as a part-time Yoga teacher in the respondent no.1-school on 6.7.2000 and she was thereafter engaged as a full time Yoga teacher w.e.f 25.9.2004. Responden...
State Vs. Raj Pal @ Raj
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2015
$~3. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL LEAVE PETITION No.235/2014 Date of decision:13. h January, 2015 STATE ..... Appellant Through Mr. Varun Goswami,APP along with SI Roshan Lal, P.S. Nangloi. versus RAJ PAL @ RAJ ..... Respondent Through Ms. Inderjeet Sidhu, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): CRL.M.A. No.4808/2014 Delay of 74 days in filing of the leave to appeal is condoned for the reasons given in the application seeking condonation of delay. The application is disposed of. CRIMINAL LEAVE PETITION No.235/2014 By impugned judgment dated 5th October, 2013, the respondent has been acquitted, giving benefit of doubt, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short). The aforesaid prosecution arose out of FIR No.31/2012, Police Station Nangloi dated 7th February, 2012.2. In the present case, the amendments made to Section 375 IPC vide Criminal Law Amendment Act,...
Cisco Systems Capital (India) Pvt.Ltd. Vs. New Delhi Tele Tech Pvt.Ltd ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:9. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:13thJanuary, 2015 + CRL. M.C. 5027/2014 CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Punit Kumar Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla & Ms. Isha Abrol, Advocates. versus NEW DELHI TELE TECH PVT. LTD. & ORS. Through: + ..... Respondents Mr. Sunil Choudhary with Mr. Raghu Vashisht, Advocates. CRL. M.C. 5036/2014 CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Punit Kumar Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla & Ms. Isha Abrol, Advocates. versus NEW DELHI TELE TECH PVT. LTD. & ORS. Through: + ..... Respondents Mr. Sunil Choudhary with Mr. Raghu Vashisht, Advocates. CRL. M.C. 5037/2014 CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Punit Kumar Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla & Ms. Isha Abrol, Advocates. versus NEW DELHI TELE TECH PVT. LTD. & ORS. Through: + ..... Respondents Mr. Sunil Choudhary with Mr. Raghu Vashisht, Advocates. CRL. M.C. 5038/2014 CISCO SYSTE...
Sarjit Singh Awla Vs. Kuldeep Singh Awla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2015
$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment:13.01.2015 CS(OS) 574/2014, I.A.No.3707/2014, I.A.No.12881/2014 and I.A.No.25069/2014 SARJIT SINGH AWLA Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Sanjeev Soni and Mr. Y.R.Shamra, Advocates. versus KULDEEP SINGH AWLA Through ..... Defendant Mr.Ashim Vacher, Mr. M.L.Mahajan and Mr. Gaurav Mahajan, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(oral) I.A.No.12881/2014 (u/O7Rule 11 (d)) 1. This is an application filed by the defendant seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground of limitation. Submission is that the plaintiff has instituted the present suit for declaration, possession, permanent injunction and damages. The plaintiff is seeking declaration to the effect that the plaintiff by virtue of a relinquishment deed dated 21.01.2008 had not relinquished his right, title or interest in favour of the defendant with respect to the suit property. Submission is that the present suit which has been filed in the y...
Dda Vs. Madhuban Holiday Inn and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2015
$~6. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:13. 01.2015 CRL.A. 545/2008 D.D.A. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, Advocate. versus MADHUBAN HOLIDAY INN & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. S.S. Lalsinghani & Mr. Gaurav Harnal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The present appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 14.09.2006 passed by Sh. A.K. Chaturvedi, Metropolitan Magistrate (MM), New Delhi acquitting the respondents accused in Case No.121/2002 under Section 14 read with Section 29(2) of the Delhi Development Act, 1957 (the Act). Leave to appeal was granted on 02.07.2008.2. The case of the appellant/ complainant Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in brief is that an inspection was conducted on 28.09.2001 of the premises in question, i.e. B-71, Greater Kailash Part-I, New Delhi. During inspection, it was found that the said property was being used for running a b...
Cit Vs. Funnay Time Finvest Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2015
$~37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:13. h January, 2015 + ITA6452012 CIT Through: ..... Appellant Mr.Rohit Madan, Mr.Ruchir Bhatia and Mr.Akash Vajpai, Advs. versus FUNNAY TIME FINVEST LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Salil Aggarwal, Mr. Prakash Kumar and Mr. Ravi Pratap, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The revenue claimed to be aggrieved by the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 10.12.2010 whereby it confirmed the order of the CIT (Appeals). The latter had directed a deletion of the sum of 28,40,000/- which was added by the A.O. The substantial question of law sought to be urged is that the ITAT and CIT(A) erred in holding that Section 148 did not apply in the facts and circumstances of the case.2. The assessee at the relevant time in A.Y. 2001-02, filed its return declaring a sum of 2860/-. The assessee was engaged in the business of investment in shar...
Mohd. Abrar Vs. Prem Chand @ Prem Singh.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2015
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + R.S.A. No.11/2015 Decided on :13. h January, 2015 Appellant MOHD. ABRAR Through: Mr.Satish Kr. Tripathi, Advocate. Versus PREM CHAND @ PREM SINGH. Through: None. Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. The learned counsel for the appellant has obtained instructions and stated that the appellant is not requiring time for vacating the premises. The learned counsel for the appellant yesterday had argued the matter for substantial period of time and the Court was prima facie of the view that no substantial question of law is involved in this matter. The learned counsel for the appellant today has stated that the Court may decide the matter on merits.2. Before dealing with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant it may be pertinent to give brief facts of the case.3. The suit for recovery of possession and mesne profits has been filed by the respondent in respect of hall converted into two parts on t...
the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sunita and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2015
$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:13. h January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 101/2007 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. versus SUNITA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appellant New India Assurance Company Limited impugns the judgment dated 23.11.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal), whereby the Claims Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.4,06,948/- in favour of Respondents no.1 to 6, who are the legal representatives of deceased Babu Lal, who suffered fatal injuries in a motor vehicular accident which took place on the intervening night of 30-31.08.2003 while driving a TSR No.DL-1RF7119.2. As per the case set up by the Respondents, deceased Babu Lal used to take on rent TSR No.DL-1RF-7119 from its owners Respondents no.7 and 8 (Respondents no.2 and 3 before the Claims Tribunal) on daily hire charges of Rs.100/-.3....
Cisco Systems Capital (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. New Delhi Tele Tech Pvt. L ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:9. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:13thJanuary, 2015 + CRL. M.C. 5027/2014 CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Punit Kumar Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla & Ms. Isha Abrol, Advocates. versus NEW DELHI TELE TECH PVT. LTD. & ORS. Through: + ..... Respondents Mr. Sunil Choudhary with Mr. Raghu Vashisht, Advocates. CRL. M.C. 5036/2014 CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Punit Kumar Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla & Ms. Isha Abrol, Advocates. versus NEW DELHI TELE TECH PVT. LTD. & ORS. Through: + ..... Respondents Mr. Sunil Choudhary with Mr. Raghu Vashisht, Advocates. CRL. M.C. 5037/2014 CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Punit Kumar Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla & Ms. Isha Abrol, Advocates. versus NEW DELHI TELE TECH PVT. LTD. & ORS. Through: + ..... Respondents Mr. Sunil Choudhary with Mr. Raghu Vashisht, Advocates. CRL. M.C. 5038/2014 CISCO SYSTE...
- ‹ Prev
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- Next ›
- Last »