Delhi Court March 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.
Hyderabad Duty Free Retail Limited Vs. Union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2015
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:17. h March, 2015 % + LPA No.147/2015, CMs No.4767/2015 (for stay), 4768/2015 (for exemption) & 4769/2015 (for filing additional documents). HYDERABAD DUTY FREE RETAIL LIMITED ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Atul Sharma, Mr. Abhishek Sharma and Mr. Yash Srivastava, Advs. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Akshay Makhija, Mr. Vikas Bhaduria and Mr. Rohitendra Deb, Advs. for R-1&2/UOI. Mr. Mehmood Pracha and Mr. Rudro Chatterjee, Advs. for R-3. Mr. Kamal Nijhawan and Mr. Sumit Gaur, Advs. for R-4. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 This intra court appeal impugns the order dated 14th January, 2015 of the learned Single Judge disposing of W.P.(C) No.6693/2014 preferred by the appellant as infructuous, leaving open the question of law raised therein.2. We have heard the counsel for the appellant, and the counsel for the respondents No.1&2 Union of India (...
M/S Ram Kripal Singh Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dav College Managing C ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 3804/2014 & IA No.24849/2014 Decided on :17. 03.2015 IN THE MATTER OF: M/S RAM KRIPAL SINGH CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. Plaintiff Through : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate versus DAV COLLEGE MANAGING COMMITTEE & ORS. Through : ..... Defendants CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The plaintiff has instituted the present suit against the defendants/DAV College Managing Committee praying inter alia for recovery of a sum of `41,75,625/- towards damages along with interest.2. The case has been placed before the court by the learned Joint Registrar who had recorded in the order dated 10.12.2014 that the suit appears to be barred by limitation.3. As per the averments made in the plaint, the plaintiff is in the business of undertaking construction work for government departments and other bodies and had participated in a pre-qualification tender for construction of a building at Pehowa, Kurukshetra, Haryana, in terms of an advert...
Sh Surinder Singh Vs. Sh Dilshad Khan and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2015
$~18 & 20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:17. h March, 2015 + MAC.APP. 717/2013 SH SURINDER SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Sailesh Gupta, Adv. versus + SH DILSHAD KHAN & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv. for R-2. Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv. with Mr. Saral Chaturvedi, Adv. for R-3/ICICI Lombard. MAC.APP. 108/2014 MAHESH YADAV Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv. versus SURINDER SINGH & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sailesh Gupta, Adv. for R-1. Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv. with Mr. Saral Chaturvedi, Adv. for R-3/ICICI Lombard. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CM APPL.2153/2014 (delay) in MAC APP.108/2014 1. Reply to the application has not been filed.2. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 246 days in filing the appeal is condoned.3. Application stands disposed of. MAC.APP. 717/2013 MAC.APP. 108/2014 4. These two appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 14.02.2013 passed by the Motor Accide...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Prema Devi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2015
$-17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:17. h March, 2015 + MAC.APP. 626/2013 U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Shadab Khan, Advocate versus PREMA DEVI & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. B.K. Mishra, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17.04.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby compensation of Rs.22,28,493/- was awarded in favour of Respondents no.1 and 2 for the death of Vikas, who suffered fatal injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 31.12.2009.2. The Appellant U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (U.P.S.R.T.C.) challenges the judgment on the aspect of negligence attributed to the driver of the bus no.UP-80-VJ-9676 as also the quantum of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal.3. During the course of arguments, it was pointed out by the learned counsel for the Appellant t...
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Sita Devi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2015
$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:17. h March, 2015 + MAC.APP. 419/2012 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD..... Appellant Through: Mr. K.L. Nandwani, Advocate versus SITA DEVI & ORS. Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL ..... Respondents G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22.02.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby compensation of `4,96,016/- was awarded in favour of Respondent No.1 for the death of Ashish, who suffered fatal injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 16.03.2008.2. The Claims Tribunal found that the accident was caused on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Tata 407 bearing registration No.HR-55F-0352.3. In the absence of any evidence with regard to the deceaseds income, the Claims Tribunal took the minimum wages of an unskilled worker, added 50% towards inflation and applied the multiplier of 14 to comput...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Prakasho Devi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2015
$-4 & 5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:17. h March, 2015 + MAC.APP. 124/2005 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR. + ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Garud M.V., Advocate for Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate versus PRAKASHO DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate for Respondents No.1 to 5. Mr. Pawan K. Bahl, Advocate for Respondent No.7. MAC.APP. 426/2005 PRAKASHO DEVI & ORS. Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate versus SANJAY KUMAR & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Pawan K. Bahl, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Mr. Garud M.V., Advocate for Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate for Respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CM. APPL. 17901/2014 in MAC. APP. 124/2005 1. The Appellants pray for dispensing with the service of Respondent No.6 as Respondent No.6 was earlier served through publication. It is stated that Respondent No.6 did not even contest the proceedings before the Claims Tri...
Prakasho Devi and Ors. Vs. Sanjay Kumar and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2015
$-4 & 5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:17. h March, 2015 + MAC.APP. 124/2005 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR. + ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Garud M.V., Advocate for Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate versus PRAKASHO DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate for Respondents No.1 to 5. Mr. Pawan K. Bahl, Advocate for Respondent No.7. MAC.APP. 426/2005 PRAKASHO DEVI & ORS. Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate versus SANJAY KUMAR & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Pawan K. Bahl, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Mr. Garud M.V., Advocate for Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate for Respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CM. APPL. 17901/2014 in MAC. APP. 124/2005 1. The Appellants pray for dispensing with the service of Respondent No.6 as Respondent No.6 was earlier served through publication. It is stated that Respondent No.6 did not even contest the proceedings before the Claims Tri...
Mahesh Yadav Vs. Surinder Singh and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2015
$~18 & 20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:17. h March, 2015 + MAC.APP. 717/2013 SH SURINDER SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Sailesh Gupta, Adv. versus + SH DILSHAD KHAN & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv. for R-2. Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv. with Mr. Saral Chaturvedi, Adv. for R-3/ICICI Lombard. MAC.APP. 108/2014 MAHESH YADAV Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv. versus SURINDER SINGH & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sailesh Gupta, Adv. for R-1. Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv. with Mr. Saral Chaturvedi, Adv. for R-3/ICICI Lombard. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CM APPL.2153/2014 (delay) in MAC APP.108/2014 1. Reply to the application has not been filed.2. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 246 days in filing the appeal is condoned.3. Application stands disposed of. MAC.APP. 717/2013 MAC.APP. 108/2014 4. These two appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 14.02.2013 passed by the Motor Accide...
State Vs. Mohd Ali Hussain @ Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL LEAVE PETITION No.183/2012 Date of decision:17. h March 2015 % . APPELLANT STATE Through : Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP for the State versus ..RESPONDENTS MOHD ALI HUSSAIN & ORS Through : None. CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G. S. SISTANI HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.CRL.M.A41272012 1. This is an application filed by the petitioner seeking condonation of 208 days delay in filing the present petition for leave to appeal. Heard. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in filing the present leave to appeal is condoned.2. Application stands disposed of. CRL.L.P1832012 3. The present leave to appeal has been filed by the State under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the acquittal of the respondents of all charges under Sections 302/34 of IPC, vide judgment dated 31.05.2011 passed by the learned trial court in S.C. No.102/2010 and also acquittal of respondent ...
Suresh Kumar Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 945/2015 SURESH KUMAR Through ..... Petitioner Mr. G.S. Charya, Advocate versus DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Respondent Through Ms. Latika Chaudhary, Advocate for Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Advocate for the DTC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA ORDER1703.2015 % KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(ORAL) Invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court, the petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge the order dated 27.09.2012 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the learned Tribunal) in Original Applications (in short OAs) No.3052/2011. Mr. G.S. Charya, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of continuity of service in terms of the order dated 29.12.1996 passed by the Honble Supreme Court in a Special Leave Petition being SLP...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »