Delhi Court May 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.
Gaurav Tuteja and Ors. Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-20-2015
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: May 20, 2015 + CRL.M.C.2128/2015 GAURAV TUTEJA & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. A.Sisodia, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .... Respondents Through: Mr.Karan Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Ram Manohar PS Maurya Enclave Respondent No.2-in-person CORAM: HONBLE MR. J USTICE SUNIL GAUR J UDGMENT (ORAL) % Crl.M.A.No.7566/2015 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.C.No.2128/2015 Quashing of FIR No.2/2012, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC registered at Police Station Maurya Enclave, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 17th November, 2012 arrived at Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Delhi. Crl.M.C.No.2128/2015 Page 1 Notice. Mr. Karan Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and she h...
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Smt. Neetu Devi and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-20-2015
$ - 28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:20. h May, 2015 + MAC. APP. 244/ 2014 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD Through: ...... Appellant Mr. Neerja Sachdeva, Advocate Versus SMT. NEETU DEVI AND OTHERS Through: ..... Respondents None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appellant has filed the present appeal against the judgment dated 10.12.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby compensation of `15,77,575/- was awarded in favour of Respondents no.1 to 4 for the death of Shri Amar Kumar, who suffered fatal injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on the intervening night of 04-05.03.2010.2. On appreciation of evidence, the Claims Tribunal found that the accident was caused on account of rash and negligent driving of the crane bearing Registration no.HR-63A-5804 by its driver Respondent no.6. Further, the Claims Tribunal took minimum wages of a non-matriculate on the date o...
Shri Praveen Kohli Vs. Smt. Komal @ Kamlesh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-20-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on :20. h May 2015 % + R. A. No.277/2015 in MAT. APP. (F.C.) 60/2014 SHRI PRAVEEN KOHLI Through: ..... Applicant Mr. Inderpal Khokhar, Advocate versus SMT. KOMAL @ KAMLESH Through: ..... Respondent None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA ORDER2005.2015 % I.S.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The present review application under Section 114 read with Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC is arising out of the order dated 13.03.2015 passed by this Court wherein, the applicant has filed an appeal against the impugned judgment and decree dated 24.08.2013 passed by the learned Trial Court of Shri Sameer Bajpai, Tis Hazari Court, and order dated 21.04.2014 passed by the learned Court of Ms. Reena Singh Nag, Judge, Family Court, West, Tis Hazari Courts.2. Consequently, the present review application is on the following grounds : The applicant has not been residing at B-39, Gali No.0, Hari Nagar Extn. N...
Jagdish Prasad Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-20-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.5912/2013 Decided on:20. May, 2015 JAGDISH PRASAD Through: .....Petitioner Mr.Prag Chawla, Advocate. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Through: Ms.Manika Advocate. .....Respondents Tripathy Pandey, CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.1. This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking a direction that the respondent should allot flat No.672, Pocket-D, II Floor, Lok Nayak Puram, Delhi or any other LIG flat of the same category under the Ambedkar Awaas Yojna (AAY) on the same terms and conditions on which the earlier flat was allotted to him.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner had got himself registered under AAY-1989 for allotment of LIG flat vide Registration No.19771/AAY-89. He was assigned priority No.19771.3. It is the case of the petitioner that there was no communication from the respondent/DDA, thereafter, regarding the Demand cum Allotment Letter (DAL). It is stated that the...
Aditya Birla Nuvo Limited Vs. M/S R.S Sales Corporation and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-20-2015
$~A-21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: MAY20 2015 + CS(OS) 1235/2013 ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through Mr.Ajay Sahni, Advocate. versus M/S R.S SALES CORPORATION & ANR ..... Defendants Through Mr.B.P.Singh Dhakray and Mr.Shakti Singh Dhakray, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) Crl. M.A. 11985/2014 1. This is an application filed under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. for initiating criminal proceedings under the said provisions against the plaintiff/defendants and its six senior officers and two counsel appointed by this court as Local Commissioners to visit the premises of the defendants vide order dated 17.06.2013.2. The present suit is filed for perpetual injunction to restrain the defendants from using, stocking, advertising, etc or dealing in clothing, footwear, head gear or any other allied goods under the impugned trade mark PETER ENGLAND. Other connect reliefs are also sought. The matter came up before th...
Institute of Geoinformatics (P) Ltd. Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: May 19, 2015 + ARB. PET. 175/2012 INSTITUTE OF GEOINFORMATICS (P) LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Vivek Singh, Advocate versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Sujoy Kumar, Adv. with Mr.Nishant Menon, Ms.Reeta Mishra, Mr.Abhishek Birthray, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act, in short) has been filed for appointment of an Arbitrator.2. It is the case of the petitioner that the pipeline division of the respondent-corporation desired to execute the work of detailed engineering survey, soil survey and providing services for establishing ROU IN ROW of Paradip, Haldia, Durgapur, LPG Pipeline Project, entered into a contract with the petitioner on July 14, 2010. The contract has an arbitration clause, which is reproduced as under:9.0.0.0 Arb.P. 175/2012 ARBITRATION P...
Raj Rani Vs. Kashmiran Mathur @ Kashmiran Sahai and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 404/2014 Reserved on:20. h April, 2015 Decided on:19. h May, 2015 % RAJ RANI Through ..... Petitioner Mr. S.S. Jain with Mr. Nikesh Jain, Advs. Versus KASHMIRAN MATHUR @ KASHMIRAN SAHAI & ANR ..... Respondent Through Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ajit Dayal and Mr. Sidharth Chopra, Advs. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Aggrieved by the order dated 7th May, 2014 granting leave to defend to the respondents, the petitioner Smt. Raj Rani who filed an eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act prefers the present petition.2. In the eviction petition filed by Raj Rani against Kashmiran Mathur and sons of late G.S. Mathur, Raj Rani stated that she was the sole, exclusive and absolute owner of the property bearing No.1, Maharaja Lal Lane, Kirpa Narain Marg, Civil Lines popularly known as Studio Building forming part of 1, Maharaja Lal Lane vide the sale deeds dated 17th May, 1996, 23rd July, 2001 and...
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd Vs. M/S Hcl Infotech Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. 1052/2014 Reserved on: May 1, 2015 Delivered on: May 19, 2015 MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Rajiv Dutta, Senior Advocate with Mrs. Rachna Joshi Issar, Ms.Ambreen Rastogi and Mr. Siddharth Dutta, Advocates. versus M/S HCL INFOTECH LTD ..... Respondent Through : Mr. V.N. Koura with Mr. S. Sirish Kumar and Mr. Abhinav Tandon, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR ORDER % 19.05.2015 1.The challenge in the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) is to an award dated 27 th August, 2014 passed by the Sole Arbitrator in the disputes in between the Petitioner Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) and the Respondent M/s HCL Infotech Limited (HCL).2. The background to the present petition is that MTNL issued a tender notice dated 24th September, 2009 inviting bids for supply of equipments, OMP10522014 installation, testing, operation, commissioning and making over th...
New Delhi Institute of Management Studies Vs. Delhi Mahila Samarj Trus ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-2015
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 2587/2014 NEW DELHI INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Bipin K. Dwivedi & Mr. Abrar Ali, Advs. versus DELHI MAHILA SAMARJ TRUST ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Navin Chawla & Mr. Ketan Paul, Advs. Date of Decision :19. h May, 2015 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) IA No.2329/2015 1. Present application has been filed by the defendant for referring the matter to an Arbitrator under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.2. Learned counsel for the plaintiff points out that all the five claims raised in para 27 of the plaint arise out of the relationship between the parties as a landlord and tenant.3. He also points out that Clause 29 of the Lease Deed is wide, comprehensive and it covers all differences or disputes arising between the parties under the Lease Deed.4. He lastly submits that as the Arbitration Clause namely, Clause 29 of the Lease Deed is an admit...
Vimla Soni Vs. Rajeev Garg
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-19-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 547/2012 & CM189282012 (Stay) Reserved on:20. h April, 2015 Decided on:19. h May, 2015 % VIMLA SONI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. S.C. Arora, Advocate. versus RAJEEV GARG Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Ranjit Malhotra, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 Aggrieved by the order dated 4th September, 2012 whereby the leave to defend application filed by the Petitioner Smt. Vimla Soni was not considered by the learned Trial Court in an eviction petition filed by Rajeev Garg, the Respondent under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short the DRC Act), the Petitioner prefers the present petition.2. The learned ARC vide the impugned order held that the leave to defend application was not filed within the period of 15 days as prescribed by law, hence denied leave to defend.3. The controversy in the present petition revolves from the service of summons to Vimla Soni. A perusal of the Trial Court record would...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »