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

Try free for 7 days Semantic AI Search

Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.

Mar 05 2015

Anuj Kumar Jain Vs. State of Nct of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-05-2015

.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order delivered on:5. h March, 2015 % + BAIL APPLN. No.2674/2014 & Crl. M. (Bail) No.11174/2014 TARA CHAND Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Suhail Dutt, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Ankit Khurana, Ms.Karishma & Mr.Alam, Advs. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. Mr.Anurag Jain, Adv. for the complainant. + BAIL APPLN. No.2680/2014 & Crl. M. (Bail) No.11176/2014 ANUJ KUMAR JAIN Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Suhail Dutt, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Ankit Khurana, Ms.Karishma & Mr.Alam, Advs. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. Mr.Anurag Jain, Adv. for the complainant. + BAIL APPLN. No.38/2015 & Crl. M.A. No.250/2015 RAMESH KR. CHOUHAN Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Sudhir Naagar, Adv. with Mr.Mukesh Saroja & Ms.Alka, Advs. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. Mr.Anurag Jain, Adv. for the complainant. + BAIL APPLN. No.119/2015 &...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 05 2015

Madanlal Babulal Chowatia and Ors. Vs. State (Govt of Nct of Delhi)

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-05-2015

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 05 2015

Ramesh Kr. Chouhan Vs. State of Nct of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-05-2015

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 05 2015

Shri Roop Chand Gupta Vs. Delhi Vidyut Board

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-05-2015

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.5784/2001 5th March, 2015 % SHRI ROOP CHAND GUPTA Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Jasmeet Chandhoke, Advocate with Mr. Gourav Chauhan, Advocate. versus DELHI VIDYUT BOARD Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sheetesh Khanna, Advocate. 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 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of the orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority and Appellate Authority; dated 29.12.2000 and 21.3.2001 respectively; by which the petitioner has been imposed penalty of reduction by four stages in his time scale of pay for a period of four years with cumulative effect. Petitioner was charged with giving illegal tube well connections without obtaining technical feasibility report and genuineness of load report, and which reports were required in terms of the circulars of the respondent/employer...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 05 2015

Icici Lombard Gic Ltd Vs. Vishal Hira Merchants Pvt Ltd. and Ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-05-2015

$~3 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on: March 05,2015 W.P.(C) 7101/2014 ICICI LOMBARD GIC LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Saurabh Kripal and Mr. Anilok Shori, Advocates. versus VISHAL HIRA MERCHANTS PVT LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Parvinder Singh and Ms. Supreet Kaur, Advocates for R-1 to R-6. Mr. Kunal Tandon, Ms. Snigdha Sharma and Ms. Kanika Jain, Advocates for R-7. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition against the order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the DRAT) dated 25.09.2014 in I.A No.675/2014 refusing to grant stay on the order dated 29.08.2014 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. The effect of which is that the petitioner is required to deposit 50% of the amount claimed by the first respondent to sixth respondent (hereafter called the borrowers). W.P.(C) 7101/2014 Page 1 2. T...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 05 2015

Suresh Kumar Vs. Ravi Kishan and Ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-05-2015

$-9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:5. h March, 2015 + MAC.APP. 1228/2012 SURESH KUMAR Through: ..... Appellants Mr.O.P. Manie, Advocate versus RAVI KISHAN & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Shoumik Mazumdar, Advocate for Respondent no.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appellant has filed the appeal for enhancement of compensation of `90,000/- awarded to him for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 01.06.2006 at 9:15 am when the Appellant was crossing a road.2. In the absence of any appeal preferred by the driver/owner or the insurance company, the finding on negligence has attained finality.3. The following contentions are raised by the learned counsel for the Appellant: (i) The appellant suffered fractured tibia right leg. He was under treatment for a long period and underwent two surgeries. The compensation awarded towards pain and suffering, attendant charges and loss of income...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 04 2015

Kalmart Systems (M) Sdn Bhd Vs. National Agricultural Co-Operative Mar ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-04-2015

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:11. 12.2014 Judgment delivered on:04. 03.2015 % + Ex.P. 378/2010 KALMART SYSTEMS (M) SDN BHD ....Decree Holder Versus NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA LTD. .....Judgement Debtor ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE: For the Petitioner : Ms. Pragya Baghel Chitale, Mr. Amol Chitale and Ms. Shweta, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. Himinder Lal and Ms. Rajni Ohri Lal, Advocates CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J1 The petitioner, by virtue of the instant petition seeks to enforce an award dated 14.04.2010, under the provisions of Section 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act). The ancillary provisions to which reference has been made is, Section 47 of the Act and Section 11 read with Order 21, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the Code). 1.1 The petitioner avers that the aforementioned award is a foreign award passed qua th...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 04 2015

Vivek Rai Vs. Aakash Institute

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-04-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI O.M.P. 561/2014 Reserved on: February 24, 2015 Decision on: March 4, 2015 VIVEK RAI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. K.K. Rohatgi, Advocate. versus AAKASH INSTITUTE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Himanshu Pathak, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT0403.2015 1. The challenge in this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) is to an Award dated 27th January 2014 passed by the sole Arbitrator in the disputes arising between the Petitioner and the Respondent (a division of Aakash Educational Services Ltd.) 2. The impugned Award was an ex parte Award requiring the Petitioner to pay to the Respondent Rs.22,74,993 together with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of the claim till realisation apart from costs of arbitral proceedings amounting to Rs.11,000.3. The Respondent is supposed to be a division of Aakash Educational Services Ltd. (AESL) which is in the business of giving tuitions en masse to childre...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 04 2015

Sambhavana Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-04-2015

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.3919 of 2014 Pronounced on:04. 03.2015 SAMBHAVANA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Pankaj Sinha with Ms. A. Gupta, Advs. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC for UOI. Mr. Naresh Kaushik with Mr. Arjun Pathak, Advs. for UPSC. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW JUDGMENT : Ms.G.ROHINI, CHIEF JUSTICE1 This petition by way of public interest litigation has been filed with the following prayers: (i) To quash the Examination Notice No.09/2014-CSP dated 31.05.2014 issued by Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for conducting Civil Services Examination, 2014. (ii) To direct the respondents to implement Section 33 of the Disabilities Act by equally bifurcating the vacancies among the three categories of persons with the disabilities. (iii) To direct the respondents to implement the Executive Order/O.M. No.16-110/2003-DD.III dated 26.2.2013 passed by the Department...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 04 2015

State Vs. Sumit @ Bachichi and Anr

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-04-2015

$~2. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:04. 03.2015 CRL.L.P. 45/2015 STATE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP ASI Jai Parkash, PS SP Badli versus SUMIT @ BACHICHI & ANR ..... Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) CRL MA13342015 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. CRL.L.P. 45/2015 1. This petition has been preferred to seek leave to appeal against the judgment dated 14.11.2014 passed by Sh. Sanjay Kumar Aggarwal in SC/67/13 arising out of FIR3572009, P.S. SP Badli under Section 392/394/397 read with 34 IPC.2. By the impugned judgment, while convicting two of the four accused, the respondents Sumit and Yogesh have been acquitted. So far as Sumit is concerned, the case of the prosecution was that on the date following the incident, i.e. on 23.12.2009, the complainant went to the police station and he was taken by the police in search of the accused...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

‹ Prev
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
Next ›
Last »

Delhi Court March 2015 Judgments

Open an 18-section brief on any judgment

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.