Delhi Court October 2016 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.
Shri Shri 108 Shri Baba Durbal Nath Maharaj Mandit Samiti (Registered) ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RSA No.317/2016 24th October, 2016 SHRI SHRI108SHRI BABA DURBAL NATH MAHARAJ MANDIT SAMITI (REGISTERED) ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.N. Kalra, Advocate. versus MOR DHWAJ CHAUHAN & ORS. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA Through: ........ RESPONDENTS To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No.39499/2016(Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. CM No.39501/2016 (condonation of delay in filing of 1 day) & CM No.39500/2016 (condonation of delay in re-filing of 141 days) For the reasons stated in the application delay in filing and re-filing the appeal is condoned. CMs stand disposed of. RSA No.317/2016 Page 1 of 11 RSA No.317/2015, CM No.39497/2016 (stay) & CM No.39498/2016 (for permission to examine the election officer) 1. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the unsuccessful plaintiff challenging the con...
M/S Kanti Bijee Utpadan Nigam Limited vs.punjab National Bank & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
$~24 * + W.P.(C) 9647/2016 & CM No.38574/2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI M/S KANTI BIJEE UTPADAN NIGAM LIMITED........ Petitioner Through : Mr. S.K. Taneja, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Puneet Taneja, Advocate versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ANR Through : Mr. Gaurav Srivastava, Advocate ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER2410.2016 1. Mr. Taneja, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner states that the briefing counsel has obtained instructions from the petitioner to the effect that they may be permitted to withdraw the present petition, while reserving the right of the petitioner to seek its remedies against the respondents as per law, before the appropriate forum vested with territorial jurisdiction to entertain the same.2. Leave, as prayed for, is granted. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, along with the pending application. OCTOBER24 2016/sk HIMA KOHLI, J...
Bajaj Allianz General Insurane Co Ltd. Vs.maya Devi & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
$~34 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:24. h October, 2016 + MAC.APP. 512/2015 and C.M. Appl. Nos.11614/2015 & 14066/2016 BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANE CO LTD. Through: Mr. Rajat Brar, Advocate .... Appellant versus MAYA DEVI & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS and Through: Mr. Niteshwar Singh, Mr.Amreshwar Advocates for respondents No.1 to 6 Singh CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.11,49,556/- has been awarded to claimants/respondents No.1 to 6. The accident dated 01st June, 2008 resulted in the death of Om 2. Prakash. The deceased was 54 years of age at the time of accident and was working as a cart-seller. The Claims Tribunal took minimum wages as income of the deceased, added 30% towards inflation, deducted 1/3rd towards his personal expenses and applied the multiplier of 11 to compute the loss of dependency of Rs.4,79,556/-. MAC.APP. 512/2015 Page 1 of ...
Delhi Development Authority vs.smt. Rajpati Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * + % RSA No.126/2013 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY24h October, 2016 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pawan Mathur, Advocate. versus ..... Respondent SMT. RAJPATI DEVI CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA Through: None. To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), which is the defendant in the suit, impugning the concurrent Judgments of the courts below; of the Trial Court dated 22.9.2011 and the First Appellate Court dated 22.3.2013; by which the courts below have decreed the suit for mandatory injunction filed by the respondent/plaintiff and directed the appellant/defendant to allot a plot of 12.5 sq mtrs to the respondent/plaintiff. Trial court had decreed the suit holding that the respondent/plaintiff had to be granted a plot of 18 sq mtrs, but, the first appellate court reduced the ...
Brijesh Kumar & Ors vs.the State Govt of Nct Delhi & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 2094/2016 & Crl.M.A. No.8866/2016 BRIJESH KUMAR & ORS Date of Decision: October 24th, 2016 ........ Petitioners Through: Mohd. Anas, Mr. Himanshu Singh, Advocate Versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT DELHI & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. G.M. Farooqui, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Sh. Brijesh Kumar, Sh. Ratan Lal Tomar, Smt. Savitri devi, Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Ms. Kanchan @ Kumud, Smt. Anita and Sh. Devender Kumar for quashing of FIR No.17/2012 dated 12.01.2012, under Sections 498-A/4IPC registered at Police Station New Ashok Nagar on the basis of Mediation Report of Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, in view of the settlement arrived at between the petitioners and respondent no.2, namely, Ms. Chetna on 24.01.2015.2. respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2, present ...
Shri Sheel Chandra & Ors vs.union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) 7132/2016 & C.M. No.29355/2016 ........ Petitioners SHRI SHEEL CHANDRA & ORS. Through: Mr.N.S.Vasisht and Mr.M.P.Bhargava, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms.Kanika Singh Assistant Standing Counsel and Mr.Rishi Vohra, Advocates for R-2/NDMC CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER2410.2016 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners praying inter alia for the following reliefs:-"(i) Issue a writ, order and direction, in the nature of certiorari and/or any other writ, order or direction, quashing the terms of Condition-V of the letter dated 26.6.1985 issued by the Respondent No.2 and the item No.3 of the letter dated 27.5.1994 requiring the handing over of possession of 1727.14 sq. yds, of land from the Property No.34, Feroze Shah Road, New Delhi free of cost as a pre-condition for the grant of completion certificate. Issue a writ, order and direction, in the nature mandamus (i...
Neena vs.yogesh Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI NEENA Judgment Reserved on: October 18, 2016 Judgment Delivered on: October 24, 2016 MAT.APP.(F.C.) 52/2015 Represented by: Mr.S.K.Gupta, Advocate. ..... Appellant versus YOGESH SHARMA ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.C.M.Mathur, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRATIBHA RANI, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/wife questioning the legality of the judgment and decree dated February 28, 2015 passed by the Family Court in HMA Petition No.246/2014 (Old No.527/11) dissolving her marriage with the respondent.2. Alleging cruelty and desertion against the appellant/wife the respondent/husband filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) praying for dissolution of his marriage by a decree of divorce. The Family Court allowed the petition on both the grounds.3. The background of this failed marriage is the emotional setback suffered by the appellant, who was unmarried, but m...
Amit Yadav & Ors vs.government of National Capital Territory of Delhi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 2218/2016 AMIT YADAV & ORS Date of Decision: October 24th, 2016 ........ Petitioners Through: Ms. Asha Yadav, Advocate Versus GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by 1. the petitioners, namely, Sh. Amit Yadav, Smt. Om Wati Yadav, Ms. Monika Yadav, Sh. Devender Yadav and Smt. Rati Yadav for quashing of FIR No.35/2010 dated 04.02.2010, under Sections 498- A/4IPC registered at Police Station Nangloi on the basis of settlement arrived at between the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, namely, Ms. Aditi Yadav on 18.12.2013.2. respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2, present in the Court has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question by SI Roshan Lal. The factual matrix of the ...
Sabreena Talwar vs.south Delhi Municipal Corporation (Administration) ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
$~42. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.585/2016 SABREENA TALWAR ..... Appellant Date of decision:24. h October, 2016 Through Ms. Prerna Mehta, Advocate. versus SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (ADMINISTRATION) AND ORS. Through Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA ........ RESPONDENTS SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): Appellant-Sabreena Talwar impugns order dated 19th September, 2016 whereby Writ Petition (C) No.7041/2016 filed by her has been dismissed.2. Having examined the impugned order and considered the argument raised, we do not find any reason to interfere.3. Vijay Kumar Mathur, respondent No.4 herein, as a proposing member and allottee/owner of flat No.1397 with consent certificates from secondary members, namely, Sarad Kapoor, owner of flat No.1398, Shabana Zaidi, owner of flat No.1399 and K.C. Katoch, owner of flat No.1400 in accordance with the scheme dated 15th February, 2016 of the Delhi Development Aut...
Rosetta Williams vs.capt. Vikrant Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
$~22. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 2884/2015 % Judgment dated 24th October, 2016 ROSETTA WILLIAMS ..... Plaintiff Through : Mr.Rohan Thawani and Mr.Anand Dagga, Advs. versus CAPT. VIKRANT SINGH CORAM: Through : Mr.Raj Kumar Rajput, Adv. ..... Defendant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J, (ORAL) I.A.No.1785/2016 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.1,64,06,000/- together with pendente lite interest at the rate of 12% per annum and further interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of decree till the date of actual payment.2. Present application has been filed by defendant under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that the same is barred by limitation and also barred by res judicata as the disputes between the parties had arisen in the year 2011, which is evident from the fact that the defendant had filed a petition under Section 11(5) of the A...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »