Delhi Court July 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.
Sanjay Gaur Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2015
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:20. 07.2015 W.P.(C) 767/2015 & CM13452015 SANJAY GAUR ... Petitioner ... Respondents versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case:- For the Petitioner : Mr B.S. Maan, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for LAC/L&B. Mr Dhanesh Relan with Mr Arush Bhandari, Advocates for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The counter-affidavit handed over by Mr Yeeshu Jain, the learned counsel on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2, is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit inasmuch as he would be relying on the averments made in the writ petition.2. The petitioner seeks the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013...
Union of India and Ors. Vs. Deen Dayal Pandey
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2015
$~08. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1645/2014 Judgment dated 20th July, 2015 % UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through : ..... Petitioners Mr.Prashant Kumar Nair, Adv. for petitioners no.1 and 2. Mr.V.S.R. Krishna, Adv. for petitioner no.3. versus DEEN DAYAL PANDEY ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Meenu Mainee, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Petitioners being aggrieved by the Order dated 6.1.2014, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in CP No.405/2013 in OA No.2103/2007, has filed the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to quash the order dated 6.1.2014.2. The facts, which have led to the filing of the present writ petition are that the respondent had approached the Central Administrative Tribunal by filing Original Application No.2103/2007, impugning the order dated 3.10.2006 passed by the peti...
Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. Vs. Sh. Satish Gujral
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No.120/2006 20th July, 2015 DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Tarun Johri, Advocate versus SH. SATISH GUJRAL Through: ..... Defendant Mr. Venancio Dcosta, Advocate with Mr. Saleem Hasan, Advocate CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a suit for recovery of money filed by plaintiff/Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. A total amount of Rs.36,50,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Fifty Thousand only) is claimed from the defendant. Out of the amount of Rs.36,50,000/-, an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) is the amount which was paid as advance to the defendant for the eight artworks/murals which the defendant was to create and thereafter supply to the plaintiff, and with respect to which obligation the defendant has as per the suit, committed breach. Plaintiff claims that defendant has committed breach of contract by wit...
Ravinder Kumar Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2015
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6818/2015 Date of Judgment :20. 07.2015 RAVINDER KUMAR Through : ..... Petitioner Ms. Smita Bankoti and Mr. Ashish Sheoran, Advocates. versus DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ORS...... Respondent Through : Ms. Latika Chaudhary, Adv. for Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G. S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM APPL. 12468/2015 (condonation of delay) 1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the present writ petition.2. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing the present writ petition is condoned. Application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 6818/2015 3. Aggrieved by the order dated 03.02.2015 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal has led to the filing of the present writ petition. The petitioner was employed by the DTC as a Driver on 04.02.2009, initially on probation for two years. His services were terminated on 02.02.2011...
Subhash Jain Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2015
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:20. 07.2015 W.P.(C) 2709/2015 and CM No.4865/2015 SUBHASH JAIN ... Petitioner ... Respondents versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Advocates who appeared in this case:- For the Petitioner For the Respondent No.1 For the Respondent No.2 For the Respondent No.3 : Mr Ateev Mathur and Mr Sumit Bansal : Mr Bhagwan Swarup Shukla : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi : Mr Dhanesh Relan with Mr Arush Bhandari CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The counter-affidavit handed over by Mr Yeeshu Jain on behalf of the respondent No.2 is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder-affidavit inasmuch all the necessary averments are contained in the writ petition.2. The petitioner seeks the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resett...
Subhash Gupta and Anr. Vs. The State and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2015
I-20 & 28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:20. h July, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 2837/2015 & Crl.M.A.No.10142-43/2015 SUBHASH GUPTA & ANR. Through: In person. ..... Petitioners versus THE STATE & ANR. Through: + ..... Respondents Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with ASI Rajneesh Mr. Karan Bir Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2 CRL.M.C. 2852/2015 & Crl.M.A.No.10163-64/2015 ROHIT YADAV Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Karan Bir Singh, Advocate with petitioner in person versus THE STATE & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Karan Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with ASI Rajneesh Respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % Crl.M.C.No.2837/2015 Crl.M.C.No.2852/2015 JUDGMENT (ORAL) Page 1 In the above captioned first petition, quashing of Criminal Complaint No.627/1, under Sections 380/4230/427/440/506/120-B of the IPC, Rohit Yadav Vs. Subhash Gupta and in the above captioned second petition, quashing o...
Naresh Bhai Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2015
$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6827/2015 Date of judgment 20.07.2015 NARESH BHAI Through : Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. H. P. Chakravorti, Advocate. ..... Respondents Mr. Jagjit Singh, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Preet Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G. S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Request for appointment on compassionate ground was rejected by a communication dated 06.05.2013 which led to the filing of OA No.2586/2013. The Tribunal dismissed the OA which forced the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the present Writ Petition.2. The facts of the case in a nutshell are that parents of the petitioner were employed by the Northern Railway. The father of the petitioner died on 01.06.1988 while in service. On an application made by his wife, elder brother of the petitioner Shri Rakesh Bhai was appointed on compassionate grounds. After a span of two decades, mo...
Rakesh Sonekar and Ors. Vs. State of Nct of Delhi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2015
I- 23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:20. h July, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 2848/2015 & Crl.M.A.No.10153/2015 RAKESH SONEKAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. S.K.Sinha, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Karan Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with ASI Rajneesh Mr. Vinay Mishra, Advocate for respondent No.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.166/2001, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of the IPC, registered at police station Anand Vihar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding of 5th January, 2015 (AnnexureP-4) reached between the parties. Notice. Mr. Karan Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and Mr.Vinay Mishra , Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant Cr...
Rohit Yadav Vs. The State and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2015
I-20 & 28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:20. h July, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 2837/2015 & Crl.M.A.No.10142-43/2015 SUBHASH GUPTA & ANR. Through: In person. ..... Petitioners versus THE STATE & ANR. Through: + ..... Respondents Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with ASI Rajneesh Mr. Karan Bir Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2 CRL.M.C. 2852/2015 & Crl.M.A.No.10163-64/2015 ROHIT YADAV Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Karan Bir Singh, Advocate with petitioner in person versus THE STATE & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Karan Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with ASI Rajneesh Respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % Crl.M.C.No.2837/2015 Crl.M.C.No.2852/2015 JUDGMENT (ORAL) Page 1 In the above captioned first petition, quashing of Criminal Complaint No.627/1, under Sections 380/4230/427/440/506/120-B of the IPC, Rohit Yadav Vs. Subhash Gupta and in the above captioned second petition, quashing o...
Union of India and Anr. Vs. M.M. Kohli
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2015
$~06. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2891/2014 Judgment dated 20th July, 2015 % UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through : ..... Petitioners Mr.V.S. Krishna, Adv. versus M.M. KOHLI Through : ..... Respondent Ms.Meenu Mainee, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to quash the impugned order dated 6.8.2013 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in O.A.No.693/2011. The respondent herein had approached the Tribunal seeking consequential benefits and refund of pension amount, which was recovered from him with interest.2. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the learned Tribunal, are that the respondent had joined Railways as a Chargeman on 20.8.1964. He was promoted from time to time. While the respondent was working as a Divisio...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »