Delhi Court February 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.
Neetu Thakur and Ors Vs. United India Insurance Company Limited and Or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
$-2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:23. d February, 2015 + MAC.APP. 56/2015 NEETU THAKUR & ORS Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Nitin Yadav, Adv. versus UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Latika Chaudhary, Adv. for Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, Adv. for DTC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is directed against the judgment dated 03.07.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby compensation of Rs.15,82,628/- was awarded in favour of the Appellants for the death of Rishi Kumar Thakur, who died in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 23.05.2010.2. The only ground of challenge raised by the Appellants is that the Claims Tribunal erred in holding that there was contributory negligence to the extent of 50% on the part of Rishi Kumar Thakur, who was driving the Maruti Car bearing registration no.DL-2CN-2472 involved in the accident and thereby reduci...
Satya Narain Prakash Punj Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
$~14 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:23. 02.2015 W.P. (C) 6390/2014 SATYA NARAIN PRAKASH PUNJ ... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Ms Anju Bhattacharya and Ms Elgin Matt John, Advocates. For the Respondents :Mr Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Mr Sunil Kumar Jha and Mr Siddharth Panda, Advocates for L&B/LAC/GNCTD. Mr Dhanesh Relan with Mr Arush Bhandari, Advocate for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. Mr Siddharth Panda, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has handed over the affidavit on behalf of Land Acquisition Collector (South). The same is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit inasmuch as all the necessary averments are contained in the writ petition.2. By way of this writ petition the petitioner seeks the benefit of ...
Satpal Dagar Vs. State and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
$~ 64 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:23. d February, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 3634/2014 SATPAL DAGAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. V.K. Dhoon, Advocate with Petitioner in person. versus STATE & ANR Through: .... Respondents Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with ASI Tej Ram. Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % ORDER (O R A L) Quashing of FIR No.340/2007, under Sections 420/467/468 of IPC registered at police station Najafgarh, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 22nd November, 2012 (Annexure P-6) arrived at between the parties at Mediation Centre, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR now stands cleared between the parties. Notice. Mr. Naveen Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState submits that respondent No.2, present in Court, is the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and he has been ...
Kamlesh Jain Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
$~25 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:23. 02.2015 W.P.(C) 7800/2014 & CM183262014 KAMLESH JAIN ... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner For the Respondent/LAC For the Respondent/DDA For the Respondent No.3 For the Respondent/MCD : Mr Uday Gupta, Adv with Mr M.K. Tripathi. :Mr Yeeshu Jain with Mr Jyoti Tyagi : Mr Pawan Mathur with Mr Himanshu Gupta : Mr Siddharth Panda. : Mr Thakur Virender Pratap Singh Charak. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition the petitioner seeks the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the201. Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioner, consequently, seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiate...
Virender Kumar and Anr. Vs. The State and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 23, 2015 + CRL.M.C.No.4511/2014 VIRENDER KUMAR & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Om Prakash Gupta, Advocate with Petitioners-in-person versus THE STATE & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Praveen Bhati, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with SI Ranveer PS New Ashok Nagar Respondents No.2 to 4-in-person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.758/2014 under Section 147/148/149/452/506/323/308 IPC registered at Police Station New Ashok Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Compromise Deed of 2nd September, 2014 (Annexure P-5) and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR now stands cleared between the parties. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState submits that respondents No.2 to 4, present in the Court, is the complainant party of the FIR in question and they have been identified to be so by SI Crl.M.C.No.4511/...
M/S Profile Estates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
$~16 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:23. 02.2015 W.P. (C) 6712/2014 & CM APPL. 15919/2014 M/S PROFILE ESTATES PVT. LTD. ... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Sumit Bansal, Mr Ateev Mathur and Ms Richa Oberoi. For the Respondents : Mr Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr Vinod Kumar Tiwari, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr Siddharth Panda, Advocates for L&B/LAC/GNCTD. Mr Pawan Mathur, Advocate for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. Mr Siddharth Panda, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has handed over the affidavit on behalf of Land Acquisition Collector (South). The same is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit inasmuch as all the necessary averments are contained in the writ petition.2. By way of this writ pe...
M/S Iacm Smart Learn Limited and Anr Vs. M/S Global Think Computer
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:23. 02.2015 CS(OS) 936 of 2010 M/S IACM SMART LEARN LIMITED & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Ashish Bhagat, Mr. Abdhesh Chaudhary, Ms. Manisha S. & Mr. Brajesh Kumar, Advs. versus M/S GLOBAL THINK COMPUTER Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI ..... Defendant NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(Oral) 1. This suit seeks a permanent injunction, restraining infringement of the trade mark; passing off; damages; delivery up, etc. against the defendant apropos the plaintiffs trade mark IACM. This trade mark is used by the plaintiffs for running their business of hardware and networking education. The plaintiffs claim to have received awards, one such award is called the Golden Peacock Award, which is considered prestigious in their industry. It has been won twice over by the plaintiffs: once for smart learning teaching methodology in the year 2002 and the other for excellence in the education and training sector in the year ...
Runche Damai Alias Bhim Bahadur Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:23. d February, 2015 +CRL.A. 881/2012 RUNCHE DAMAI alias BHIM BAHADUR ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Vivek Sood with Mr.Rakesh Sharma, Mr.Prem Prakash and Mr.S.Kukreja, Advs. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr.O.P.Saxena, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Who is a father?. A father is an essential component of the family, which, in turn, has been acknowledged as one of the most important units of society, in relation to the wellbeing and especially the nurturing and protection of children. We should never lose sight of the fact that a father derives his position and power from cultural prescriptions of manhood. Being a man and a father meant being able to exercise self-restraint. This entailed, among other things, not resorting to violence especially against women. Abusing women is regarded as a cowardly act and men who engaged in such practices should be excluded socia...
Ntpc Ltd. Vs. Patel Engineering Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI O.M.P. 743/2013 Reserved on: January 13, 2015 Decision on: February 21, 2015 NTPC LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. S.B. Upadhyaya, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath, Advocate. versus PATEL ENGINEERING LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Malavika Lal, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2102.2015 1. This petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 ('Act') by NTPC Ltd. is directed against an Award dated 26th March 2013 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal ('AT') regarding the disputes between NTPC Ltd. and the Respondent Patel Engineering Ltd. arising under a contract dated 5th September 2006 for the construction of the Head Race Tunnel Package as part of the 600 MW Loharinag Pala Hydroelectric Power Project in Uttarkashi, Uttarakhand. The total value of the contract was Rs. 216,29,89,177 and Euro 171,95,368. The period of completion was 38 months from the date of iss...
Mohinder Pal Singh Vs. Kamalpreet Kaur Lamba and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-21-2015
1# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 244/2013 and CM No.3575/2013 (Stay) Decided on:21. t February, 2015 % MOHINDER PAL SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. M.L. Bajaj, Advocate. versus KAMALPREET KAUR LAMBA AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil K. Mittal, Mr. Rohit K. Nagpal and Mr. Anuj Arora, Advocates for Respondent No.1. Mr. Manjeet Singh Bhamra, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. Matrimonial disputes between the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 have led to multiple litigations between the parties and the present petition arises from the same. Petitioner is the father-in-law of respondent No.1 and father of respondent No.2.2. A brief exposition of the facts necessary for the adjudication of the present petition is that the Respondent No.1 had filed civil suit before this Court being CS No.205/2006 wherein on an undertaking by the Petitioner and the Respondent No.2 the suit was disposed of. The undertaking gi...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »