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.
State Bank of India Vs. S and S Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. 505/2013 Reserved on: May 7, 2015 Date of decision: May 28, 2015 STATE BANK OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Gopal Jain, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajiv Kapur and Mr. Vidur Bhatia, Advocates. Versus S & S TECHNOCRATS PVT. LTD. & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vivekanand, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR % JUDGMENT2805.2015 1. The State Bank of India (SBI) in this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) challenges an Award dated 23rd January 2013 passed by the sole Arbitrator in the disputes between SBI and Respondent No.1. Background facts 2. The background facts are that M/s. Taneja Associates Pvt. Ltd. invited tenders on behalf of the Petitioner for the execution of civil works in the construction of Staff Training Centre and Circle stationery store at Sector 62, Noida. This was done after the earlier contractor, M/s. Singh Contractors Company had failed to execute the work with...
State Vs. Surender Saini and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A.584/2014 Reserved on:01. 05.2015 Date of Decision:28. 05.2015 % STATE ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Varun Goswami, APP for the State. Versus SURENDER SAINI & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Jitender Sethi & Mr.Haimendra Jailija, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J:1. The present appeal on behalf of the State is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 05.03.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Fast Track Court (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in Sessions Case No.98/2009 (reference FIR No.138/2008 PS Pahar Ganj) whereby the Respondents have been acquitted of the charges under Sections 302/364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short).2. The Respondents, employees of Oxford Management Services, a Recovery Agency associated with HSBC Bank, had been chargesheeted and tried for the offence of killing Sajauddin (deceased), another employe...
State Vs. Sonu Sharma and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL LEAVE PETITION No.11/2015 Date of decision:28. h May, 2015 % STATE .........APPELLANT Through: Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP for State. Versus SONU SHARMA & ANR. ........RESPONDENT Through : None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G. S. SISTANI HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.1. By the present Leave Petition filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 05.09.2014 passed by the learned Trial Court in Session Case No.94/1, whereby both the respondents (accused before the Trial Court) were acquitted of the charge punishable under Sections 452/34 of the Indian Penal Code and respondent No.2 Suresh @ Suri was also acquitted of the charge punishable under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the respondent No.1 was convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The facts of the case, as noticed by the learned trial court, are that DD...
Faryaz @ Fayaz Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2015
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: May 28, 2015 W.P. (C) 1877/2015 FARYAZ @ FAYAZ .... Petitioner Through: Mr. Saurabh Dev Karan Singh and Mr. Sandeep Phogat, Advocates Versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Jagjit Singh and Mr. N. Prashant Kumar Nair, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA JUDGMENT % KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.1. By this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 11 th November, 2014 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi whereby the Tribunal dismissed the O.A. being No.4209/2010 preferred by the petitioner. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondents to grant him appointment on any suitable basis in the Railways as per the announcement made by the then Railway Minister.2. To appreciate the controversy at hand, it would be necessary to give a brief gist of...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Parvati Devi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2015
$~ 34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:28. h May, 2015 + MAC.APP. 621/2012 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Tarkshwar Nath, Adv. with Mr. Saurabh Kumar Tuteja, Adv. versus PARVATI DEVI & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Rana Ranjit Singh, Adv. with Mr. Basant Gupta, Adv. for R-1 to R-6. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25.02.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby compensation of `7,02,000/- was awarded in favour of Respondents no.1 to 6 (the Claimants before the Claims Tribunal) for the death of Narender Kumar, who suffered fatal injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 25.08.2009 at 3:00/3:15 a.m.2. On appreciation of evidence, the Claims Tribunal found that the accident was caused on account of rash and negligence act of the driver to the Tata Canter bearing registration no.HR-67-0588. It was cla...
Edward Khimani Kamau Vs. The Narcotics Control Bureau
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. h May, 2015 +CRL.A. 1113/2011 EDWARD KHIMANI KAMAU Through: ..... Appellant Mr.Vikas Gautam, Advocate versus THE NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Mukesh Malik, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Edward Khimani Kamau impugns the judgment dated 06.05.2011 and the order on sentence dated 11.05.2011 vide which he was convicted under Section 21(C) read with Section 23 read with Section 28 of NDPS Act and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lac in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year in Sessions Case No.13/09.2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the prosecution case is that the Respondent-Narcotic Control Bureau (NCB) through its intelligence officer Sh Akhilesh Kumar Mishra filed a complaint against the accused inter alia on the allegations that on 05.02.2009 at about ...
Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2015
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5557/2015 SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Madan Gera, Adv. versus % GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Peeyoosh Kalra, Adv. for R- 1 & 3. Mr D.K. Pradhan, Adv. for Mr Brijesh Mahapatra, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER2805.2015 CM No.9984/2015 (Exemption) 1. Allowed subject to just exceptions. WP(C) 5557/2015 & CM No.9983/2015 (Stay) 2. By this writ petition the petitioner, effectively, seeks an extension of the agreement dated 19.05.2005, executed by the petitioner with Director, Health Service, Govt. of NCT of Delhi (i.e., respondent no.3), till 07.11.2016. 2.1 It is the petitioners case that because a dispute obtained between the DDA and respondent no.3, on the issue of deposit of ground rent, DDA did not issue an NOC for construction and operation of the plant. Resultantly, there was a delay of nearly 18 months. It is that part of 18 months...
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nasruddin and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2015
$-7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:28. h May, 2015 + MAC. APP. 585/2012 BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajat Brar, Advocate versus NASRUDDIN AND ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is for reduction of compensation of Rs. 8,28,873/awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of Respondent no.1 for having suffered grievous injuries resulting in 58% permanent disability in respect of right lower limb in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 29.12.2006.2. The finding on negligence is not challenged by the Appellant Insurance Company.3. The following contentions are raised on behalf of the Appellant Insurance Company: (i) The Claims Tribunal made an addition of 50% towards future prospects while computing the loss of future earning capacity. The same is not permissible in view...
Udai Singh Vs. Kendriya Vidayalaya Sangathan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: May 28, 2015. + W.P. (C) 8440/2011 & C.M. APPL. No.1370/2012 UDAI SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Jyoti Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sajjan Kumar Singh and Ms.Tinu Bajwa, Advocate. Versus KENDRIYA VIDAYALAYA SANGATHAN ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S. Rajappa, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA JUDGMENT % KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.1. Guru Govind Dou Khade, Kakke laagun paye..Balihari guru aapne, govind dio bataye. This immensely popular & often quoted couplet by Poet-saint Kabir has a profound foothold. It says I face both God and my guru, who should I bow first?. I first bow to my guru because hes the one who showed me the path to God. The importance given to a teacher or a guru in our society thus needs no special mention. Since times immemorial, the relationship between teachers and students has been venerated. It is considered to be a pious bond which is further strength...
Suman Kundra Vs. Sanjeev Kundra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2015
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAT. Appeal No.32/2009 Decided on :28. h May, 2015 SUMAN KUNDRA Through: Appellant Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, Senior Advocate with Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat & Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocates. Versus SANJEEV KUNDRA Through: Respondent Mr. Jai Bansal & Mr. Nath Mohan Prafulla, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.1. This is an appeal filed under Section 28 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the appellant against the order dated 16.3.2009 by virtue of which the application of the appellant for dismissal of the petition for divorce filed by the respondent herein under Section 13 (i) (a) of the Hindu Marriage Act was sought to be dismissed on the ground that the marriage between the parties had been contracted under the Special Marriage Act, therefore, the petition for divorce ought to have been filed under the Special Marriage Act.2. The question which is arising for consideration is as to whether the court can reject an ap...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »