Delhi Court February 2015 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2015 Page 5 of about 616 results (0.025 seconds)Muhammad Khan and Anr. Vs. Bishan Chand and Ors.
Court: Delhi
$-20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:27. h February, 2015 + MAC.APP.972/2013 MUHAMMAD KHAN & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. N.K.Jha, Advocate versus BISHAN CHAND & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate for Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation of `1,85,000/awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) for the death of Javed Khan, a bachelor, who suffered fatal injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 14.07.2008.2. On appreciation of evidence, the Claims Tribunal found that the accident was caused because of rash and negligent driving of Tata Truck bearing registration no.DL-1M-2448 by its driver. The Claims Tribunal further found that the Appellants were not financially dependent upon the deceased and therefore, it declined to grant any compensation towards loss of dependency and granted c...
Tag this Judgment!Shokeen Vs. State of Nct of Delhi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
$~79 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 27, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 5476/2014 & Crl. M.A. 18690/2014 SHOKEEN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain and Mr. A.C. Boxipatra, Advocates versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with SI Gopal Singh Mr. Varun Malik, Advocate for complainant along with complainant/respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.371/2012, under Section 308 of IPC registered at police station Mehrauli, Delhi is sought on the basis of Settlement Deed of 28th November, 2014 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 respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant Crl.M.C.No.5476/2014 Page 1 of the FIR in question and he has...
Tag this Judgment!Mohan Murti Vs. Deutache Ranco, Gmbh
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:25. 07.2014 Pronounced on:27. 02.2015 + RFA (OS) 5/1994, C.M. APPL.4553/2013 MOHAN MURTI Through: Ms. Ananya Bhattacharya, Advocate. VERSUS DEUTACHE RANCO, GMBH Through: Ms. Tasneem Ahmadi, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. This is a defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree in the summary suit, being Suit No.1383/1989, for recovery of ` 1,51,50,000/plus interest of ` 58,75,620/-. The appellant/defendants application seeking leave to defend the suit was dismissed on 15.10.1993. Plaint 2. The facts alleged in the plaint are that the respondent company (hereafter "the plaintiff") engages in the business of manufacturing and selling controls and devices for refrigeration and air conditioning equipment. The defendant carries on his business under the name of Nexim/Mohan Murti, at 47, Ring Road, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi as well as at 110/111...
Tag this Judgment!Sudhir Sharma Vs. The Commissioner of Customs
Court: Delhi
$~28 to 35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:15. 09.2014 Pronounced on:27. 02.2015 + CUS.A.A.29/2011, C.M. APPL.11198/2011 SUDHIR SHARMA ....Appellant versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ..... Respondent + CUS.A.A.32/2011, C.M. APPL.13036/2011 R.N. ZUTSHI ....Appellant versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ..... Respondent + CUS.A.A.33/2011, C.M. APPL.13070/2011 AJAY YADAV ....Appellant versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ..... Respondent + CUS.A.A.34/2011, C.M. APPL.14101/2011 YASH PAL ....Appellant versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ..... Respondent + CUS.A.A.35/2011, C.M. APPL.14197/2011 V.K. KHURANA ....Appellant versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ..... Respondent + CUS.A.A.36/2011, C.M. APPL.14199/2011 T.R.K. REDDY ....Appellant versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ..... Respondent + CUS.A.A.37/2011, C.M. APPL.14201/2011 PRADEEP RANA ....Appellant versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ..... Respondent CUS.A.A.29/11 and connected matters Page 1 + CUS.A.A.38/2011, C.M. APP...
Tag this Judgment!Nexus Design Project Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Travel Foods Services (Delhi Termin ...
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Arb.P. No.340/2014 NEXUS DESIGN PROJECT PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sacchin Puri with Mr. Khowaja Siddiqui and Mr. Abhinav Dang, Advocates for Petitioner/Applicant in IA No.3005/2015. versus TRAVEL FOODS SERVICES (DELHI TERMINAL3 PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Surekha Raman and Mr. Anuj Sarma, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER5 27.02.2015 IA No.3005/2015 (for restoration of petition) 1. For the reasons stated in the application, the petition is restored to file.2. The application is disposed of. Arb. P. No.340/2014 3. By this petition under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (Act), Nexus Design Project Pvt. Ltd. (NDPPL) seeks appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between it and the Respondent Travel Foods Services (Delhi Terminal3) Pvt. Ltd. (TFSPL) arising out of five work orders to be carried out at Terminal 3 of the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. The c...
Tag this Judgment!Radhey Shyam Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : February 27, 2015 + W.P.(C) 5935/2013 RADHEY SHYAM Represented by: ..... Petitioner Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Rashmi Malhotra, Advocate with Ms.Priyanka Bharihoke, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Relevant facts necessary to be noted for adjudication of the present petition are that in the year 1994 the petitioner was appointed as a Constable in Railway Protection Force (hereinafter referred to as the (RPF) and posted at New Delhi Railway Station in the year 2011.2. On July 07, 2011, the Disciplinary Authority issued an order placing the petitioner under suspension with effect from July 03, 2011. Significantly, the suspension order dated July 07, 2011 merely records that the petitioner has been placed under suspension and nowhere records that petitioner should present hi...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~85 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 27, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 752/2015 & Crl. M.A. 2863/2015 ANIL KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Rahul Bhagat, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Saminder Singh Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.47/2009, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC registered at police station Rajinder Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Settlement, terms whereof are reflected in Family Courts order of 1 st December, 2014. Notice. Ms.Nishi Jain, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and she has been identified to be so by SI Saminder Singh on the basis of identity CRL.M.C. 752/2015 Page 1 proof produced by her. Respondent No.2,...
Tag this Judgment!L/Naik Naveen Kumar Vs. Uoi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: February 24, 2015 Judgment Delivered on: February 27, 2015 % + W.P.(C) 6155/2010 L/NAIK NAVEEN KUMAR Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.D.S.Kauntae, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Rishi Kapoor, Advocate for Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC W.P.(C) 1091/2014 L/NAIK PAWAN KUMAR Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.D.S.Kauntae, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Barkha Babbar, Advocate W.P.(C) 1591/2013 NAIK SUBHASH SINGH Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.D.S.Kauntae, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Barkha Babbar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARDEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PARDEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The petitioners in the three captioned petitions hold the rank of either a Lance Naik or a Naik and are aggrieved by the fact that they have been reverted from the Parachute Battalion of the Indian Army to, what the re...
Tag this Judgment!Suman Lata Vs. Govt. of Nct Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~S-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : February 27, 2015 + W.P.(C) 557/2014 SUMAN LATA Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.R.K.Shukla, Advocate for Mr.U.Srivastava, Advocate versus GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Ferida Satarwala, Advocate for GNCTD CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Under orders of the Chief Justice the reference made by the learned Single Judge has been placed before us.2. The claim of the writ petitioner : Suman Lata, is pleaded on the fact that the respondents issued an advertisement inviting applications to appoint honorary Anganwadi Helpers in the year 2004 and in response thereto she applied and was interviewed. A panel was prepared somewhere in the year 2006-07 in which her name was at serial No.38. Whereas honorary appointments were made initially by offering the appointment to the empanelled ...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and Ors. Vs. Birendra Singh and Anr.
Court: Delhi
$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of hearing and Order:27. 02.2015 W.P.(C) 1920/2015 & CM Nos.3448-49/2015 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through ..... Petitioners Mr. R.V. Sinha & Mr. R.N. Singh, Advs. versus BIRENDRA SINGH & ANR. ..... Respondents Through Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA ORDER KAILASH GAMBHIR, J (ORAL) W.P.(C) 1920/2015 & CM Nos.3448-49/2015 1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek to challenge the impugned order dated 28.05.2014 in O.A. No.4147/2012 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, whereby the learned Tribunal has allowed the O.A. preferred by the respondents.2. Mr. R.V. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that respondents were initially appointed as daily wagers on 29.08.1992 and 22.12.1992 respectively in the office of the Custodian, the Special Court (TORTS) Act, 1992, Banking Division (De...
Tag this Judgment!