Delhi Court November 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.
Parveen Kumar vs.har Prakash
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2016
$~24. * + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA9162016 and CM APPL. 43837-43838/2016 PARVEEN KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ram Kishan Saini, Advocate versus HAR PRAKASH Through: None ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant/plaintiff ORDER2511.2016 against the judgment and decree dated 19.08.2016, pronounced by the trial court in a suit for recovery of Rs.11 lacs instituted by him against the respondent/defendant alongwith interest @5% per month from the date of institution, till realisation.2. Under the impugned judgment and decree, the trial court has partially decreed the suit in favour of the appellant/plaintiff by holding that he is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- from the respondent/defendant, subject to adjustment of dues, if any, contemporaneous to handing over vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the respondent/defendant in terms of the Rent Agreement dated 19.03.2012 (Ex.P...
Neelima Amodekar and Others vs.registrar of Cooperative Societies & Ot ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.6610/2015 NEELIMA AMODEKAR AND OTHERS Reserved on:23. d August, 2016 Date of Decision:25. h November, 2016 ....Petitioner Through Mr. S.K. Sharma & Mr. Vishal Thakre, Advocates. Versus REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES & OTHERS ..Respondents Through Mr. Varun Nischal, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Manoranjan, Advocate for respondent No.2. % CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA SANJIV KHANNA, J.This writ petition by Neelima Amodekar and her two children Kshitij Amodekar and Nijatma Amodekar impugns the order dated 16th March, 2015 passed by the Delhi Cooperative Tribunal, whereby Appeal No.189/2011/DCT filed by Police Computers Cooperative Group Housing Society Limited has been allowed and the award dated 27th August, 2011 has been set aside.2. The petitioners herein are legal representatives of Jayant Amodekar, the claimant in the Arbitration Case No.3042/DR/ARB/2010-2011, whic...
Dr. Asha vs.university of Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * + % W.P.(C) No.7289/2016 25th November, 2016 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Banati, Advocate with Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate. versus Dr. ASHA UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Das, Advocate and Mr. Ankit Mangla, Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr. Harsh K. Sharma, Advocate with Ms. Ragini, Advocate, Ms. Vaibhavi Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Raghav Ghai, Advocate and Mr. Rohit Gaur, Advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. No.32544/2016 (for directions) 1. By this application, the respondent no.3/Governing Body of Daulat Ram College seeks vacation of the interim order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 19.8.2016, and which order reads as under:-"W.P.(C) No.7289/2016 Page 1 of 10 WP(C) 7289/2016 Notice. Ms. Si...
Sanjay Kumar vs.m/s Amba Cinema & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2016
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:25. h November, 2016 + W.P.(C) 5300/2014 SANJAY KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Sarfaraz Khan, Advocate versus M/S AMBA CINEMA & ANR. Through: Mr.N.K. ........ RESPONDENTS for Jha, Advocate respondent no.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has challenged the award dated 21st March, 2014 passed by the Labour Court whereby his claim has been rejected.2. The petitioner challenged his termination on the ground that he has been illegally terminated by the respondent. The respondent contested the petitioners claim on the ground that there was no employer-employee relationship and in any case, the petitioner has not completed 240 days of service.3. The Labour Court held that there was a relationship of employer and employee between the parties. However, with respect to the petitioners claim of having worked for 240 days, the Labour Court held that the petitioner has failed to prove t...
Manju Barjatya vs.uma Singh (Since Deceased) Through Lrs & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2016
$~4 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 25, 2016 RFA(OS) 5/2016 MANJU BARJATYA ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.J.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Rajesh Gupta and Mr.Harpreet Singh, Advocates ........ RESPONDENTS versus Represented by: None UMA SINGH (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LRs & ANR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(ORAL) RFA(OS) 5/2016 & CM No.1365/2016 1. There is a delay of 3628 days in filing the appeal. But for the reasons mentioned hereinafter, so compelling is the cause of justice that we would be constrained to not only condone the delay in filing the appeal but even allow the appeal.2. But before that, we would need to note that the plaintiff in the suit was Ms.Uma Singh who has since expired. Her sons : Gautam Singh and Vikram Aditya Singh have been impleaded as R-1(a) and R-1(b). The two were served for November 18, 2016. None appeared for them. We had re- RFA(OS...
Pradeep & Anr. Vs.state Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2016
$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : NOVEMBER25 2016 + CRL.M.C. 4411/2016 & Crl.M.A.Nos.18409-10/2016 PRADEEP & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through : Mr.Jitendra Sethi with Mr.Akash Sharma and Mr.Ambar Tewari, Advocates. Versus ..... Respondent STATE NCT OF DELHI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG Through : Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP. SI Pradeep Sharma, PS Rajinder Nagar. S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated 10.11.2016 of learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby the application moved under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall PW-14 (SI Ritesh Kumar) was dismissed.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. PW-14, the initial Investigating Officer, was present on 10.11.2016 to record statement. The petitioners counsel was not available Crl.M.C.4411/2016 Page 1 of 2 that day. Since the witness had to come from Bihar, t...
Union of India & Ors. Vs.hari Singh & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2016
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6669/2015 and CM No.12162/2015 (Stay) Date of Decision :25. h November, 2016 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through Mr. B. K. Berera, Advocate ........ Petitioners versus HARI SINGH & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. A. K. Trivedi and Mr. Ashok K. Vij, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL)1) Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, The Engineer in Chief and the Garrison Engineer (I), has filed this writ petition impugning the order dated 18.03.2015 passed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal whereby O.A. No.3335/2013 filed by Hari Singh, Murti Devi, Mehar Chand, Dharam Singh and Mangat Ram has been allowed, directing that they would be paid arrears from the date of initial appointment/promotion to the post of Valveman or 16.10.1981, whichever was later.2) Respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4, namely Hari Singh, Mehar Chand and Dha...
Rashmi Nagrath vs.m/s Sarva Priya House bldg.socy. Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2016
Date of Decision:25. 11.2016 versus ..... Appellant IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI LPA891997 RASHMI NAGRATH M/S SARVA PRIYA HOUSE BLDG.SOCY. LTD. ..... Respondent $~ * % + + + Present: Mr.Rajat Navet & Ms.Sanya Talwar, Advocated for the appellant LPA1121997 PRANAV KAPUR THE REGISTRAR COOP.SOCY & ORS ....... RESPONDENTS ..... Respondent LPA1441997 SANJAY KAPOOR REGR. OF COOP.SOCY.LTD versus ..... Appellant ..... Appellant versus in LPA891997. Mr.Neeraj Malhotra, Mr.Rupal Luthra & Ms.Sakshi, Advocates for the appellant in LPA1441997. Ms.Niharika Ahluwalia, Advocate for DDA in all cases. Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Advocate for R-1 in all cases. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) 1. These are three appeals arising from a common order of the learned Single Judge dated 4.4.1997. In LPA891997 the appellant Mrs. Rashmi Nagrath seeks to challenge the said order dated 04.04.1997 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition of ...
State (Gnct of Delhi) vs.pawan Kumar Chhokra & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 499/2016 Date of Decision:25. 11.2016 ........ Petitioner STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) PAWAN KUMAR CHHOKRA & ANR. versus Through: None. Through: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for State. SI Mahendra Koli, PS Subzi Mandi ....... RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA GITA MITTAL, J (Oral) Crl.M.A.No.14592/2016 (Condonation of delaly) We have heard Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, learned APP for the State on this application for condonation of delay. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filiing the petition is condoned. This application is allowed. CRL.L.P. 499/2016 1. The instant petition has been filed by the State under Section 378(1) Cr.P.C. complaining that the respondents deserve to be convicted under Section 307 IPC with which they were charged and further that the Trial Judge has erred in releasing the respondents on probation and payment of compensation. Crl.L.P. No.499/2016 Page 1 of 5 2. We ...
Evergreen Veneers P. Ltd. Vs.principal Commissioner of Income Tax Delh ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2016
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON:25. 11.2016 W.P. (C) 8986/2016, CM APPL.36486 & 36489/2016 EVERGREEN VENEERS P. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. S. Krishnan, Advocate. Versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-03 & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Puneet Rai, Jr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(ORAL) 1. The writ petitioner is aggrieved by an order made by the respondents (hereafter the revenue) transferring its assessment case from ITO, Ward- 8(4), New Delhi to DCIT, CC-2(4),Kolkata, under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act (hereafter the Act).2. The... Petitioner company was incorporated at New Delhi, while its manufacturing facility is located at Vishakhapatnam. Since its inception in 1992, the income-tax authorities at New Delhi have regularly assessed it. One of the directors of the... Petitioner company one Mr....
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »