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.
Smt. Pooja Saxena vs.union Bank of India & Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * + % SMT. POOJA SAXENA W.P.(C) No.9910/2016 10th November, 2016 .....Petitioner Through: Mr. V.P.S. Tyagi, Advocate. versus UNION BANK OF INDIA & OTHERS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. O.P. Gaggar and Ms. Runashree Saikia, Advocates for R-3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) W.P.(C) No.9910/2016 and C.M. Appl. No.39421/2016 (for stay under Section 151 CPC) 1. There are two reliefs which are claimed in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner against the respondent no.1/Union Bank of India. The first relief is the claim for regularization and the second relief is for claiming of a variable component of monetary entitlement payable as per the contract of employment. W.P.(C) No.9910/2016 Page 1 of 3 2. So far as the grant of regularization of services of the petitioner are concerned, it is seen that the petitioner had earlier...
Sachin Goyal & Ors vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 669/2016 SACHIN GOYAL & ORS Date of Decision: November 10th, 2016 ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Neeraj Sharma and Mr.Mohan S., Advs. Versus STATE & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Izhar Ahmad, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI Learned Additional Public Prosecutor P.S.TEJI, J.1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Sh. Sachin Goyal, Sh. Suresh Chand Aggarwal, Smt. Geeta, Sh. Anup Aggarwal and Smt. Renu Aggarwal for quashing of FIR No.93/2014 dated 11.02.2014, under Sections 498-A/4IPC registered at Police Station Krishna Nagar on the basis of settlement arrived at between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, namely, Smt. Shalini Aggarwal. respondent-State 2. 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 Arvind Kumar.3. The factual matrix of the present case is that the ma...
Hari Chand vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :2. d NOVEMBER, 2016 DECIDED ON :10. h NOVEMBER, 2016 + CRL.A.860/2013 & CRL.M.B. 7634/2015 HARI CHAND ..... Appellant STATE Through : Mr.Vivek Sood, Sr.Advocate with Mr.M.L.Yadav & Mr.Siddharth Gupta, Advocates. VERSUS ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Amit Gupta, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is a judgment dated 30.03.2013 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.51/2013 arising out of FIR No.PS Begumpur by which the appellant Hari Chand was convicted for committing offence punishable under Section 376 IPC. By an order dated 02.04.2013, he was sentenced to undergo RI for ten years with fine `10,000/-.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge- sheet was that on 13.11.2009 at about 01.30 p.m. at House No.204, First Floor, Pocket-18, Sector-24 Rohini, the appellant committed rape upon the Crl.A.860/2013 Page 1 of 10 prosecutrix X (Changed name). On 13...
Vinod Trivedi vs.atul Jain & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
$~A-2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CM(M) 1039/2016 VINOD TRIVEDI Date of Decision:10.11.2016 ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Alamgir, Advocate. versus ATUL JAIN & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through Ms.Anju Lal and Ms.Shalu Lal, Advocates for R-1 & 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) CM No.38067/2016 (exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. CM(M) 1039/2016 and CM No.38066/2016 (stay) 1. By the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 27.07.2016 by which his application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was dismissed.2. The brief facts are that the petitioner claims that his father was a tenant in the suit premises since 1950. The plaintiff has filed the suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act. The need arose to file the present application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC as it is the contention of the petitioner that he has during the pendency of the suit come ...
Farhan Alam vs.the State (Govt of Nct Delhi) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 1809/2016 FARHAN ALAM Date of Decision: November 10th, 2016 ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Mohd. Sohail & Mr.Matloob Alam, Adv. versus THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT DELHI) & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr.M.P. Singh, APP for the State. Mr.Sheika Imran Alam, Adv. with respondent no.2 in person. 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 petitioner, namely, Sh. Farhan Alam for quashing of FIR No.845/2012 dated 15.10.2012, under Sections 380 IPC registered at Police Station Jamia Nagar on the basis of oral settlement arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no.2 namely, Mrs. Subetara on 28.04.2016.2. respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2 present in the Court has been identified to be the complainant/first informant in the FIR in question by her counsel. The factual matrix of the present case is that the complainant 3. received a call from mo...
Sanjay Kumar & Ors vs.state of Nct of Delhi & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 2397/2016 SANJAY KUMAR & ORS Date of Decision: November 10th, 2016 ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Jagat Ram, Mr.Abhinav Dang and Mr.Yashvardhan Singh Rathore, Advs. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.G.M.Farooqui, APP. Mr.A.S.Agarwal, Adv. for R-2. 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. Sanjay Kumar, Sh. Jhankaroo Lal and Sh. Vidyawati for quashing of FIR No.290/2010 dated 08.11.2010, under Sections 498-A/406 IPC registered at Police Station Timarpur on the basis of settlement arrived at Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, executed between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, namely, Smt. Sarika on 04.06.2016.2. 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 her counsel.3. The fa...
Dr. Rahul Kumar vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
* + % Dr. RAHUL KUMAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.7804/2015 10th November, 2016 ........ Petitioner Through: Ms. Jaya Tomar, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. T.P. Singh and Mr. Sahaj Garg, Advocates for R-1 & 3. Mr. V.N. Koura, Advocate IOCL/R-2. for CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner/Dr. Rahul Kumar seeking directions from this Court against respondent No.2/Indian Oil Corporation Limited to appoint the petitioner to the post of Quality Control Officer.2. It is undisputed that pursuant to the advertisement No.RD- 2014 (1) of respondent No.2, the petitioner was successful in the written test W.P.(C) No.7804/2016 Page 1 of 5 and in the interview, and was given the offer of employment in terms of the Letter of respondent No.2 dated 17.12.2014. Before the grant...
k.s. Kardam vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA No.958/2011 % Reserved on :1. t September, 2016 Pronounced on :9. h November, 2016 K.S. KARDAM Through : Mr.Ashish Pratap Singh, Advocate Appellant Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through : Mr.Roshan Lal Goel, Advocate for Respondents UOI. Mr.A.B. Dayal, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Kunal Anand, Advocate for R-2 to 4 CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA SANJIV KHANNA, J.This Letters Patent Appeal impugns the judgment dated 23rd September, 2011, dismissing W.P.(C) No.948 of 1991 filed by the appellant- K.S. Kardam.2. The primary challenge is to the order dated 22nd February, 1989 passed by the Assistant General Manager of Syndicate Bank (Bank, for short) removing the appellant from service, and the order dated 4th July, 1989 passed by the General Manager of the Bank dismissing the review petition filed by the appellant against the punishment of removal. For the sake of convenience, we would like to discuss and deci...
Mohammed Irshad Alias Raju vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. No.683/2000 Date of Decision:09. 11.2016 MOHAMMED IRSHAD ALIAS RAJU ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Sitab Ali Choudhary, Adv. STATE versus Through: Mr.Varun Goswami, APP ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA for the State GITA MITTAL, J (Oral) 1. The appellant Mohd. Irshad @ Raju was sent up for trial alongwith co-convicts Salaudin and Satish in the case arising out of the FIR No.52/98, registered at P.S. Welcome under Sections 307/3IPC. After joint trial they stand convicted for the commission of offence under Section 3and 3IPC by the impugned judgment dated 29.06.1999. Pursuant to the order of the same date the appellant stands sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/-. In default it has been directed that the appellant Irshad shall undergo imprisonment for six months for commission of the offence under Section 3IPC. For the offence under Section 3IPC the ap...
Canbank Financial Services Ltd. Vs.sfl Industries Ltd. & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:9. h November, 2016 CS(OS) No.2557/2000 CANBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. Through: Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, Adv. ..... Plaintiff % + Versus ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Adv. for D-2. SFL INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR CORAM:-"HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The counsel for the plaintiff and the counsel for the defendant no.2 Shri Harbhajan Singh have been heard.2. The plaintiff instituted this suit for recovery of Rs.1,20,49,597.24p with interest, jointly and severally from the two defendants, pleading (i) that the plaintiff, vide its letter dated 12th December, 1990 sanctioned and agreed to provide the defendant no.1 lease finance to the extent of Rs.50,00,000/- for installing the plant, machinery and equipment at Village & P.O. Rail Majra, Tehsil Balachaur, District Nawanshahr, Punjab; (ii) on 12th December, 1990 itself an agreement of lease of the said plant and machinery was executed at New Delhi; (iii) as per th...
- ‹ Prev
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- Next ›
- Last »