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.
Aarushi Mahajan vs.guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
$~65 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(C) 11059/2016 & CM No.43191/2016 Judgment delivered on:22. 11.2016 AARUSHI MAHAJAN ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS versus GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY AND ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. S.N. Khanna, Adv.. : Mr. Mr. Vaibhav Kalra and Ms. Neha Bhatnagar, Advocates for R-1 Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Standing Counsel with Ms. Simran Jeet, Adv. for DU CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) CM No.43192/2016 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 11059/2016 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking a direction to the respondents not to cancel the provisional admission of the petitioner to the MBA Programme due to non submission of the result of the B.Com (Final Year). The petitioner was granted provisional admission to the MBA Programme because the result of the qualifying W.P.(C) No...
State (Nct) of Delhi vs.manoj Kumar @ Lala & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. No.574/2016 Date of Decision:22. 11.2016 STATE (NCT) OF DELHI ........ Petitioner Through Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for State. With SI Kamlesh, PS Ambedkar Nagar Versus MANOJ KUMAR @ LALA & ORS. Through None. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA GITA MITTAL, J (Oral) CRL. M.A. 16827/2016 1. The petition is accompanied by an application seeking condonation of delay of 55 days in filing the leave petition.2. For the reasons stated in the application, we are satisfied that the petitioner was prevented from sufficient cause in filing the leave petition belatedly. The delay of 55 days in filing the leave petition is, therefore, hereby condoned. This application is allowed. Crl.L.P.574/2016 Page 1 of 6 CRL.L.P. No.574/2016 1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has sought leave to appeal against a judgment dated 19th April, 2016 whereby four persons, namely, Manoj Kumar @ Lala ...
Ram Chander Yadav vs.new Delhi Municipal Council
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
$~01. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment dated 22nd November, 2016 + W.P.(C) 8081/2016 RAM CHANDER YADAV ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.N.K. Sahoo, Adv. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ..... Respondent Through : Mr.H. Peechara, Mr.Mananjay K. Mishra, Ms.Shailja Nanda Mishra and Mr.Vidhi Jain, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to quash the order dated 22.3.2016 passed by Director (Enforcement), NDMC, whereby the representation of the petitioner dated 1.6.2015 was rejected. It may be noticed that the petitioner had filed the aforestated representation pursuant to the order dated 15.10.2015 passed by the Delhi High Court in a writ petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 19.2.2015 passed by the respondent, whereby the tehbazari site originally allotted to late Sh.Shy...
Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd vs.ircon International Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
$~ * 7 + 9 + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ARB.P. 596/2016 HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rishi Agrawala and Ms.Nadia Rafiq, Advocates. versus IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dinesh Agnani, Senior Advocate with Ms. Leena Tuteja, Advocate. And ARB.P. 652/2016 HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rishi Agrawala and Ms.Nadia Rafiq, Advocates. versus IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dinesh Agnani, Senior Advocate with Ms. Leena Tuteja, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR ORDER2211.2016 1. Both these arbitration petitions filed by the... Petitioner, Hindustan Construction Company Limited, under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Arb.P. 596/2016 & 652/2016 Page 1 of 12 Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) against the Respondent, Ircon International Limited, seek the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudic...
Prem Singh vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
$~72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(C) 10130/2015 & CM249312015, 11111/2016 Judgment delivered on:22. 11.2016 PREM SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ....... Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: : Ms Richa Oberoi : Mr V.P. Singh Charak with Ms Shubhra Parashar : Mr Siddharth Panda : Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal For the... Petitioner For the Respondent UOI For the Respondent L&B For the Respondent DDA CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. 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 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) in respect of which Award No.28/2...
South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. V.d. Chawla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment :22. 11.2016 + W.P.(C) 3632/2015 & C.M. No.6479/2015 SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION........ Petitioner Through Ms.Madhu Tewatia, Advocate. versus V.D. CHAWLA ...... Respondent Through Mr.S.K.Jain, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(oral) 1... Petitioner before this Court is the SDMC. It is aggrieved by the order dated 22.01.2014 passed by the Municipal Taxation Tribunal. By this common order 9 appeals had been decided. 2 Facts at the outset disclose that this dispute relates to the determination of the annual value under the Unit Area system of the property tax which was for the Assessment Years 2004-05 to 2012-13. The averments in the petition disclose that the petitioner had been issued a show cause notice dated 12.10.2012 under Sections 123-D of W.P.(C) 3632/2015 Page 1 of 8 the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 notifying the respondent to produce relevant evidence/documents to...
Sh. Madanjit Kumar vs.union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * + % W.P.(C) No.7087/2016 22nd November, 2016 ........ Petitioner SH. MADANJIT KUMAR Through: Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Advocate. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Kunal Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner impugns the order dated 2.8.2016 of the respondent no.2/M/s Central Electronics Ltd/employer whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Sahibabad (NCR region) to Chandigarh.... Petitioner also challenges the consequent relieving order dated 3.8.2016.2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has a daughter who has 100% profound mental retardation and also locomotor disability, W.P.(C) No.7087/2016 Page 1 of 13 and hence the petitioner should no...
Raj Kumar vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(C) 8389/2015 & CM178932015 Judgment delivered on:22. 11.2016 RAJ KUMAR versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ....... Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners For the Respondent UOI For the Respondent DDA For the Respondent L&D : Mr Arun K. Sharma : Mr Rajesh Kumar with Mr Priyank Khattar and Mr Atul Krishna : Mr Himanshu Rewatkar for Mr Sushil Dutt Salwan : Mr Siddharth Panda CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. 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 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) in r...
South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs.shri Ghanshyam Dass Seth Through ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment :22. 11.2016 + W.P.(C) 3093/2015 & C.M. No.5532/2015 SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION........ Petitioner Through Ms.Madhu Tewatia, Advocate. versus SHRI GHANSHYAM DASS SETH THROUGH LRS...... Respondent Through Mr.S.K.Jain, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(oral) 1... Petitioner before this Court is the SDMC. It is aggrieved by the order dated 22.01.2014 passed by the Municipal Taxation Tribunal. By this common order 9 appeals had been decided. 2 Facts at the outset disclose that this dispute relates to the determination of the annual value under the Unit Area system of the property tax which was for the Assessment Years 2004-05 to 2012-13. The averments in the petition disclose that the petitioner had been issued a show cause notice dated 03.10.2012 under Sections 123-D of W.P.(C) 3093/2015 Page 1 of 8 the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 notifying the respondent to produce releva...
Fci, Gurdaspur vs.m/s Padda Trading Company & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
$~ * 26 + FCI, GURDASPUR Reserved on: November 9, 2016 Date of decision: November 22,2016 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. versus M/S PADDA TRADING COMPANY & ORS. Through: None ..... Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2211.2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI OMP (COMM) 261/2016 & IA197602014 1. The Food Corporation of India (FCI) has filed this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act), challenging the impugned Award dated 19th September 2013, modified by the Addendum Award dated 21st February 2014 and further modified by the Supplementary Award dated 6th June 2014 passed by the sole Arbitrator in the disputes between FCI and the Padda Trading Company (PTC) (Respondent No.1) and its partners (Respondent Nos. 2 to 5), arising out of an Agreement dated 12th October 1994 for the purposes of storing paddy.2. By the aforementioned impugned Award, the learned Arbitrator rejected the claim of FCI in the sum of Rs...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »