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.
Raj Kumar Jain Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:14. h November, 2014 Date of Decision:8. h January, 2015 % + CRL. M.C. 1868/2014 RAJ KUMAR JAIN Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anurag Jain, Advocate. versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION .....Respondent Through: Mr. K. Raghavacharyulu, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH JUDGMENT1 By way of the present petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), the petitioner calls in question the order dated 21.03.2014 passed by learned Special Judge-03 (PC Act), New Delhi and order on charge dated 29.03.2014 for the offence under Section 109 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) read with Section 13(2) and Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. Shorn off unnecessary details, the facts of the case are that on 06.05.2005, on the basis of source information an FIR beari...
Nina Khanna and Ors Vs. Narayan Parwal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2015
7 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 367/2012 NINA KHANNA AND ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Sonali Chopra, Advocate. versus NARAYAN PARWAL ..... Defendant Through: Mr. J.M. Bari, Advocate for defendant. Mr. Anil Sapra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mridul Yadav and Ms. Rupali Kapur, Advocates for M/s. Unique Buildwell (India) Pvt. Ltd. Date of Decision:08. h January, 2015 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) I.A. 21849/2014 (condonation of delay) in O.A. 239/2014 Keeping in view the averments in the application, delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly, present application stands allowed. O.A. 239/2014 1. Present appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 27th September, 2014 passed by the Joint Registrar dismissing the appellantdefendants application under Order I Rule 10 CPC for impleadment of M/s. Unique Buildwell (India) Pvt. Ltd. The relevant portion of the impugned order is reproduced hereinbelow:- ...............H...
Ved Prakash Vs. Suraj Saxena and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 341/2014 & CM173962014 (stay) Decided on:8. h January, 2015 % VED PRAKASH Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajat Aneja, Mr. Vijay Kasana, Advs. versus SURAJ SAXENA & ORS Through ..... Respondent Mr. Puneet Goel, Adv. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) CM173952014 Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CAVEAT9292014 Counsel as above appears for the respondent/ caveator, hence caveat is discharged. RC.REV. 341/2014 & CM173962014 (stay) 1. Aggrieved by the order dated 1st July, 2014 passed by the learned Rent Controller allowing the eviction petition filed by the respondent Smt. Suraj Mukhi the petitioner prefers the present petition. Smt. Suraj Mukhi, wife of late Gopi Chand had filed an eviction petition No.E-74/2011 before the Rent Controller seeking eviction of the petitioner from the premises situated at plot No.209, P.O. Block Krishna Nagar, Delhi i.e. two rooms and one store room on the ground floor wh...
Shree Bhagirathi Ganga Educational and Cultural Soci Vs. Delhi Develop ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2015
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) No.4394/2014 Decided on :8. h January, 2015 SHREE BHAGIRATHI GANGA EDUCATIONAL & CULTURAL SOCIETY (REGD.) Petitioner Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor & Mr. Hemant Singh, Advocates. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Respondent Through: Mr. Dhanesh Relan & Mr. Arush Bhandari, Advocates for the DDA. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.1. This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner society for issuing demand-cum-allotment letter of a plot measuring 800 square meters in Block E, Sector 16, Rohini, for setting up of a nursery school.2. Briefly stated the facts leading to filing of the present writ petition are that the petitioner society is stated to have applied for allotment of a land for nursery school vide application No.3497 on 19.3.2001. On 12.4.2001, the Directorate of Education is purported to have sent a letter to the respondent/DDA recommending the case of the petitioner society for establishment of a nursery school. On 3...
Maina Devi Vs. Rati Ram and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:8. h January, 2015 + CS(OS) 1705/2003 MAINA DEVI Through: ..... Plaintiff Ms. Anu Bagai, Advocate versus RATI RAM AND ANR. Through: ....Defendants Ms. Neha Kapoor, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL IA NO.13109/2014 (O.XIV Rule 5 CPC) in CS(OS) 1705/2003 1. This application for deletion of issues no.1,2 and 3 in view of the judgment dated 23.12.2013 in CS(OS) No.509/1991 and the judgment dated 10.08.2005 in RCA No.8/2004 (passed by the learned Additional District Judge) is filed by the Plaintiff.2. Before coming to the instant application, it will be appropriate to narrate a few facts necessary for disposal of the application.3. This suit for possession under Section 5 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, damages and mesne profits has been filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendants on the ground that the suit property consisting of a plot of land measuring 213.5 sq. yds., out of Khasra No.256/1, situated in the abadi ...
National Investor Forum Regd. Vs. Golden Forests India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2015
$~10 & 11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :08. 01.2015 + REV. PET.352/2014 IN W.P.(C) 1399/2010 NATIONAL INVESTOR FORUM REGD. ..... Petitioner versus GOLDEN FORESTS INDIA LTD. + ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 1400/2010 NATIONAL INVESTORS FORUM ..... Petitioner versus GOLDEN FORESTS INDIA LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Sh. Narender. S. Yadav and Sh. Harpal Singh Saini, Advocate, for Review Petitioner. Sh. Harpawan Kumar Arora, Advocate, for Committee-GFIL. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % REV. PET.352/2014 IN W.P.(C) 1399/2010 1. The applicant/petitioner seeks review of the judgment and order of this Court dated 28.04.2014. At the outset it is noticed that this application was adjourned on several previous dates. Today also, a request for W.P.(C) 1399/2010 & W.P.(C) 1400/2010 Page 1 adjournment is sought on the ground that the senior advocate is not available. The Court declined it.2. T...
Suresh Khanna Vs. Op Suri Memorial Education Society
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:8th January, 2015 + CS(OS) 563/2014 SURESH KHANNA Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Bhupsh Narula, Advocate versus OP SURI MEMORIAL EDUCATION SOCIETY ....Defendant Through: Mr. Uchit Bhandari, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL IA No.18727/2014 (O.VIII r/w. Section 151 CPC) in CS (OS) 563/2014 1. By virtue of this application, the Defendant seeks extension of time for filing the written statement. It is urged by the Defendant that the Plaintiff had been awarded construction contract where-under the Defendant had made a payment of Rs. 2,82,00,000/-. However, the work awarded to the extent of Rs.20,80,800/- had not been completed by the Plaintiff in terms of the contract and thus, the Plaintiff had been paid a sum over Rs.51,00,000/- in excess of the amount actually payable to him.2. It is averred that as against the claim of Rs.1,54,41,500/- made by the Plaintiff, in fact the Defendant was entitled to refund of Rs.51,91,959...
Nand Kishore Decd Thr Lrs and Ors Vs. Yashpal Bhatia and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2015
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on: January 08, 2015 RC.REV. 226/2012 NAND KISHORE DECD THR LRS & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Ajit Dayal, Mr. M.K. Bansal and Mr. Lohit Bimal, Advocates versus YASHPAL BHATIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Gyan Mitra, Adv. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned order dated 20.03.2012 whereby their leave to defend application in the eviction petition under Section 14(1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short DRC Act) has been dismissed.2. The case of the respondents in the eviction petition is that they are the landlord and owner of the property bearing No.9/2185, Gali No.8, Kailash Nagar, Delhi, being the only legal heirs of late Bhagat Vallabh Dass who had let out shop measuring 6 x 9, situated on the ground floor of this property, to Ramesh Chand and Nand Kishore on 28.04.1996. Both Nand Kishore and Ramesh Chand have since died and hence...
National Investors Forum Vs. Golden Forests India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2015
$~10 & 11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :08. 01.2015 + REV. PET.352/2014 IN W.P.(C) 1399/2010 NATIONAL INVESTOR FORUM REGD. ..... Petitioner versus GOLDEN FORESTS INDIA LTD. + ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 1400/2010 NATIONAL INVESTORS FORUM ..... Petitioner versus GOLDEN FORESTS INDIA LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Sh. Narender. S. Yadav and Sh. Harpal Singh Saini, Advocate, for Review Petitioner. Sh. Harpawan Kumar Arora, Advocate, for Committee-GFIL. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % REV. PET.352/2014 IN W.P.(C) 1399/2010 1. The applicant/petitioner seeks review of the judgment and order of this Court dated 28.04.2014. At the outset it is noticed that this application was adjourned on several previous dates. Today also, a request for W.P.(C) 1399/2010 & W.P.(C) 1400/2010 Page 1 adjournment is sought on the ground that the senior advocate is not available. The Court declined it.2. T...
M/S Xerox Modi Corp Ltd. Vs. The Special Director, Enforcement Directo ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2015
$~R-12. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:08. 01.2015 CRL.A. 300/2009 M/S XEROX MODI CORP LTD. Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Vijay Nair & Ms. Neeharika Aggarwal, Advocates. versus THE SPECIAL DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Mr. Vishal Gohri & Mr. Jitender, Advocates for respondent/ ED. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. At the commencement of the hearing today, learned counsel for the respondent has sought to urge the preliminary objection taken by it in its reply, namely to the territorial jurisdiction of this Court to deal with the present appeal.2. In this regard, reference is made to Section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, which provides that Any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Appellate Tribunal may file an appeal to the High Court ... ... ... ... .... In the explanation, the term High Court has been defined to mean (a) the High Court ...
- ‹ Prev
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- Next ›
- Last »