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.
Bhupener Singh & Ors. Vs.university of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:25. 10.2016 $~86, 87,88,89 & 90 * % + W.P.(C) 7722/2016 & CM No.31887/2016 AKHIL KUMAR SAINI versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS. Advocates who appeared in the case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent: + W.P.(C) 7723/2016 & CM No.31892/2016 PARAG PARASHAR Mr. Ashish Mohan, Adv. Mr. M.J.S. Rupal & Ms. Simranjeet, Adv. ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner Versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS. Advocates who appeared in the case: For the... Petitioner: For the... RESPONDENTS: Mr Tushar Rudra, Advocate. Mr M.J.S.Rupal & Ms.Simranjeet, Advocate ........ RESPONDENTS + W.P.(C) 7866/2016 & CM No.32568/2016 SAGAR BATRA & ORS. ........ Petitioner Versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS. Advocates who appeared in the case: For the... Petitioner: For the... RESPONDENTS: Mr Bhaskar Subramanian, Advocate. Mr M.J.S.Rupal & Ms.Simranjeet, Advocate ........ RESPONDENTS W.P.(C) Nos. 7722/2016 & connected matters Page 1 of 5 +...
Rail Land Development Authority vs.bhagwati Rail Infra Pvt. Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:24. 10.2016 + O.M.P. (COMM.) 372/2016 & IA No.9484/2016 RAIL LAND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ........ Petitioner versus ..... Respondent BHAGWATI RAIL INFRA PVT. LTD. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU : Mr Amit Kumar and Mr Shaurya Sahay. : Mr Arunav Patnaik and Ms Bhabna Das. VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioner, Rail Land Development Authority (hereinafter RLDA), has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter 'the Act') for setting aside the award dated 30.04.2016 (hereafter the impugned award) passed by the Arbitral Tribunal (hereafter 'the Tribunal') constituted by Mr. Chander Parkash, Mr. M.R. Garg and Mr. S.P. Mehta (presiding). By the impugned award, the Tribunal has adjudicated the disputes raised by Bhagwati Rail Infra Pvt. Ltd (hereinafter BRIPL) a company incorporated und...
State of Nct of Delhi vs.arun Kumar & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + DECIDED ON :24. h OCTOBER, 2016 CRL.L.P.316/2016 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.Amit Gupta, APP. VERSUS ARUN KUMAR & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(Oral) CRL.M.A.No.9128/2016 (Delay) 1. For the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, the delay is condoned.2. The application for condonation of delay is disposed of. CRL.L.P.316/2016 1. The instant leave to file appeal petition has been preferred by the State to challenge the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 21.11.2015 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.64/2015 arising out of FIR No.577/2014 registered under SectionsIPC at PS Baba Haridas Nagar. Crl.L.P.316/2016 Page 1 of 5 2. I have heard the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and have examined the Trial Court Record. On perusal of the Trial Court record, it reveals that on the victims com...
Jasvinder Kaur vs.jaspal Kaur & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
$~13 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 848/2015 JASVINDER KAUR ..... Plaintiff Through Ms. Anjali Chopra, Advocate versus JASPAL KAUR & ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr. Manjit Singh Ahluwalia, Advocate for Defendant no.1. Mr. P D Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Gurjeet Kaur, Advocate for defendant no.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI % ORDER2410.2016 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for partition, possession and permanent injunction. The plaintiff is the daughter of the defendant no.1. Defendant nos. 2 to 5 are the sisters of the plaintiff.2. The suit properties comprises of being property No.L-28 (old no.17) situated in Abadi known as Shastri Nagar, Village Chokri Mubarkabad, Delhi, now popularly known as L-28, Shastri Nagar, Delhi- 110 052 measuring 100 sq. yards, built upto second floor.3. The second property is M-10, Anand Parbat, Industrial Area, New Delhi- 110 005 measuring 65 sq. yards, which is built up property. Both the properties belonged to Sard...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.lalita Jha & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~51 * % + MAC.APP. 110/2016 & CMs 3737/2016, 34589/2016 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Date of Decision:24. h October, 2016 Through: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate ..... Appellant versus LALITA JHA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Ghanshyam Thakur, Advocate 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.27,12,000/- has been awarded to respondents no.1 to 6. The accident dated 17th September, 2014 resulted in the death of 2. Ajay Kumar Jha. The deceased was aged 44 years at the time of the accident and was in private job as Manager. It was claimed that the deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. The deceased was holding a professional degree of MBA from L.N. Mishra College of Business Management, Mirzapur, Bihar. However, in the absence of any documentary proof of income, the Claims Tribunal assumed his income on the basis of his educationa...
Surinder Singh vs.m/s s.e. Investments Ltd & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
$~ * 40 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI O.M.P. 1568/2014 SURINDER SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Sudhir Naagar, Mr. Vijay Kasana Advocates. versus Through: Mr. P. Nagesh, Advocate. .... Respondent M/S S.E. INVESTMENTS LTD & ORS CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR % ORDER2410.2016 1. This petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act , 1996 (Act) seeks to challenge the Award dated 20th November 2013 passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator.2. The background of the present petition is that the Respondent No.2 - Schifflies India Ltd., a company of which the... Petitioner was the Director at the relevant time, availed the loan from the Respondent No.1, vide loan agreement dated 26th March 2010 which contained the arbitration clause. Both the... Petitioner as well as other Director namely Respondent No.3 herein stood as guarantors for the loan.3. The Respondent No.2 Company having defaulted in the repayment of the loan, the dispute was referred to the Arbitrator app...
Khubi Ram Sharma vs.yashpal & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RSA No.78/2013 and RSA No.94/2013 * + % RSA No.78/2013 KHUBI RAM SHARMA24h October, 2016 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Mr. Gobind Kumar, Mr. Soaqib Qurashi and Mr. Sachin, Advocates. versus YASHPAL & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. RSA No.94/2013 UMESH CHAND SHARMA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Parvinder Chauhan and Mr. Nitin Jain, Advocates. versus YASHPAL & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES RSA No.78/2013 and RSA No.94/2013 Page 1 of 20 VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. These Regular Second Appeals under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) are filed against the concurrent Judgments of the courts below; of the Trial Court dated 24.5.2011 and the First Appellate Court dated 22.1.2013; by which the suits for injunction filed by the appellants/plaintiffs were dismissed. The claim in th...
United India Insurance Company Ltd vs.shashi Prabha Arora & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~33 * % + Date of Decision:24. h October, 2016 MAC.APP. 198/2015 and C.M. Appl. 3441/2015 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. L.K. Tyagi, Advocate versus SHASHI PRABHA ARORA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Asif Hashmi, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3 JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.17,31,000/- has been awarded to claimants/respondents No.1 and 3. The accident dated 02nd September, 2013 resulted in the death 2. of Bhim Sen Arora. The deceased was aged 55 years at the time of accident and was survived by his widow and two sons who filed claim petition before the Claims Tribunal. The deceased was working as a Sales Manager in a private firm at the time of accident. It was claimed that the deceased was earning Rs.17,000/- per month apart from commission of Rs.5,000/- per month.3. took the income of the deceased as Rs.17,000/- per month,...
New Delhi Hotels Ltd & Anr vs.association of Apartment Owners of Merca ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
$~A- * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CM(M) 1308/2013 Date of decision:20. 10.2016 NEW DELHI HOTELS LTD & ANR ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Mohit Gupta and Mr.Rohit Gupta, Advocates versus ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF MERCANTILE HOUSE (REGD) ..... Respondent Through Ms. Sunita Bhardwaj, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. The present petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer that this court may order/direct striking of plaints in Suit No.92/2013 title as Association of Apartment Owners Ltd. vs. New Delhi Hotels Ltd. and Suit No.94/2013 titled as Association of Apartment Owners Ltd. vs. New Delhi Hotels Ltd. 2. Some of the relevant facts are that the controversy revolves around the Mercantile House, 15 KG Marg, New Delhi. The details of the dispute have already been stated in a connected matter being CM(M) 634/2013 which has also been disposed of along with the present petition.3. The releva...
Dish Tv India Ltd. Vs.gulf Dth Fz Llc
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: October 24, 2016 + FAO(OS) 271/2016 DISH TV INDIA LTD. .....Appellant Represented by: Mr.Arvind Nigam, Mrs.Pratibha M.Singh, Senior Advocates instructed by Mr.Tejveer Bhatia, Mr.Saket Sikri, Ms.Kanika Singh, Mr.Rohan Swarup & Ms.Heena Khan, Advocates versus GULF DTH FZ LLC .....Respondent Represented by: Mr.P.Chidambaram, Mr.Amit Sibal, Mr.Arun Katpalia, Senior Advocates instructed by Mr.Rishi Agrawala, Ms.Niyati Kohli, Mrs.Aayushi S.Khazanchi, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The appellant is the first defendant in the suit; plaintiff whereof is respondent No.1. As per respondent No.1, it has broadcast rights under licenses from different content owners in Middle-East and North America (MENA) Region comprising : Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Chad, Djibouti, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine,...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »