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.
Letminjoy Haokip vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2016
$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : NOVEMBER08 2016 CRL.M.B.1656/2016 IN CRL.A.583/2016 LETMINJOY HAOKIP ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.R.A.Worso Zimik, Advocate. STATE versus ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG Through : Mr.Arun K.Sharma, APP. W/SI Gurdeep Kaur, PS M.Nagar. + S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks interim bail to resume BA (Pass), final year during academic year 2016-17. Status report is on record.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. The petitioner was convicted under Section 304(1) IPC and was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for nine years in case FIR No.1under Section 302 IPC registered at Police Station Maurice Nagar. Nominal roll dated 12.10.2016 reveals that he has undergone two years, one month and thirteen days incarceration besides remission for one month and eleven days as on 12.10.2016. He is not a previous convict and is not involved in any other case. Statu...
National Highways Authority of India vs.prakash Atlanta Jv
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2016
$~ * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: October 26, 2016 Decision on: November 8, 2016 O.M.P. (COMM) 84/2016 & IA No.4396/2016 (delay) NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ........ Petitioner Through: Ms. Gunjan Sinha Jain with Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocates. versus PRAKASH ATLANTA JV ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, Advocate. AND O.M.P. 103/2015 PRAKASH ATLANTA JV ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, Advocate. versus NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Pradeep K. Bakshi with Ms. Prachi V. Sharma, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR O.M.P. Nos. 103 of 2015 & O.M.P. (COMM) 84 of 2016 Page 1 of 13 % JUDGMENT0811.2016 IA No.4396 of 2016 in O.M.P. (COMM) 84 of 2016 1. This is an application filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) for the condonation of the delay of 28 days in filing the application under Section ...
Yash Kumari & Anr. Vs.state (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2016
#4 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:8. h November, 2016 BAIL APPLN. 116/2015 YASH KUMARI & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Neeraj Grover and Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocates versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through Mr. Keshav Mohan and Mr. Rishi K. Awasthi, Advocate for the complainant along with complainant CORAM: HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) Crl. MA No.5895/2016 in Bail Application No.116/2015 1. The present application has been instituted on behalf of the complainant- Mr. C.M. Sethi, in the subject FIR bearing No.841/2014, under Sections 406/4IPC, registered at Police Station- Preet Vihar, Delhi, seeking recall of the order dated 18th March, 2015 passed by this Court. Bail Application 116/2015 Page 1 of 9 2. In order to appreciate the submissions made on behalf of the applicant/complainant, it is necessary to extract the said order dated 18th March, 2015 and the same reads as follows:-"Counsel appearing on beh...
M/S Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd vs.vijay Mahajan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2016
$~A-1 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.R.P. 55/2016 Date of decision:8. 11.2016 M/S OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD ........ Petitioner Through Mr.P.S.Narsimha, ASG with Mr.Sashi Prabhu, Adv. versus VIJAY MAHAJAN ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal and Mr.Ekansh Agarwal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. By the present petition filed under section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code the petitioner seeks to impugn the judgment of the trial court dated 25.2.2016 by which an application under Order 16 Rule 1 CPC filed by the respondent for summoning of witnesses was allowed.2. Some relevant facts are that the respondent claims to be an Agent of foreign firms/companies providing various services as an intermediary to help in easy and convenient mode of communication and also to do all such acts necessary for the tendering process for various Indian public sector companies. The respondent was banned by the petitioner vide orde...
Col (Retd) Ajay Ahlawat vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2016
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :8. h November, 2016 + BAIL APPLN. 2031/2016 COL (RETD) AJAY AHLAWAT ........ Petitioner STATE Through : Mr.R.N.Mittal, Sr.Advocate with VERSUS Mr.Sumit Chaudhary, Mr.Ankit Goel & Mr.Ravin Rao, Advocates. ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(Oral) 1. in The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. case FIR No.489/2016 registered under Sections 341/342/370/419/370(A)(2)/120B/34 IPC and Sectionsof Foreigners Act at PS Safdarjung Enclave. Status report is on record.2. I have heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and have examined the file. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner urged that the petitioner has joined the investigation on 20.07.2016. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to his filing complaint against senior officers of Delhi Police. In a raid conducted by Income Tax Of...
Col t.k.chatterjee vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2016
$~1 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI LPA3722016 & CM No.21975/2016 Judgment pronounced on :08. November, 2016 COL T.K.CHATTERJEE Through : Mr. G. Tushar Rao with Mr.Mayank Sharma, Advocates. ..........Appellant Versus ......Respondents Through : UNION OF INDIA & ORS. CORAM HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL Ms. Barkha Babbar with Ms. Dipanjali Tyagi, Advocates For UOI SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.1. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed seeking to challenge the order of the learned Single Judge dated 30.03.2016 in W.P.(C) 2610/2014 dismissing the writ petition with directions to the appellant to pay damages on account of unauthorized occupation of the Ministry of Defence Pool Accommodation No.D-II/B-48, Moti Bagh.2. The brief facts as observed by the writ petition are as follows:" i) that the petitioner joined Indian Army on 18 th December, 1984 and was in the year 2001 allotted the accommodation at Moti Bagh since he was then servin...
Rotomac Electricals Ltd. Vs.union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2016
* + :1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI LPA3632016 & CM No.21426/2016 Pronounced on:08. h November,2016 ROTOMAC ELECTRICALS LTD. ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Bishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Chandrachur Bhattacharya, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Mr. Sanjeev Narula and Ms. Vinita, Advocates. CORAM HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL JUDGMENT MS. G. ROHINI, CHIEF JUSTICE This appeal is preferred against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 18.05.2016 in W.P.(C) No.8417/2015. The unsuccessful petitioner is the appellant before us.2. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.3. As could be seen from the material available on record, the appellant/writ petitioner was granted an advance licence dated 22.12.1999 under Duty Exemption Scheme under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 (for short 'FTDR Act'). As per the conditions of the licence, the appellant was required to...
Eshu Chaudhary vs.delhi High Court Bar Association and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Delivered On:08. 11.2016 ........ Petitioner W.P.(C) 8179/2016 ESHU CHAUDHARY DELHI HIGH COURT BAR ASSOCIATION AND ORS Through: None versus Through: Mr. Ravikant Chadha, Sr. Advocate, ........ RESPONDENTS Chief Election Commissioner Mr. R.K. Watel, Advocate, Election Commissioner. Mr. Rajiv Khosla, Respondent No.3 in person. Mr. Rishabh Bansal, Advocate for R-4 along with Mr. Abhijat, Respondent No.4 in person CORAM: HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) CM APPL.41013/2016 (Directions) The present application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed on behalf of Ms. Sunita Bhardwaj, who has W.P.(C) 8179/2016 Page 1 of 4 offered her candidature for the post of President of the Delhi High Court Bar Association in the ensuing elections, scheduled to be held on 18.11.2016. The present application essentially prays for a direction to the Election Commission to install and utilize Electronic...
Jitender @ Bantu vs.govt of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2016
$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : NOVEMBER08 2016. BAIL APPLN. 1050/2016 + JITENDER @ BANTU Through : Mr.Gaurav Sharma, Advocate. ........ Petitioner versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP. Insp.Dheeraj Singh, PS Narela. S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.16under Sections 3IPC and Arms Act registered at Police Station Narela. Status report is on record.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. I have also gone though the citation Ahkam vs.State of Uttaranchal (2001 CRI.L.J.3818) (Uttaranchal High Court).3. The petitioner is facing trial under Section 302 IPC for allegedly committing murder of Premwati by complainants brother-in-law (Jija) along with his two associates. In the FIR Geeta (deceaseds daughter) had assigned specific role to Dinesh Mathur for firing at her mother when he Bail...
Union of India and Ors. Vs.deena Nath and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2016
$~12. * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.10137/2015 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ Petitioners Date of decision:8. h November, 2016 Through Mr. Himanshu Kaushik, Advocate for Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Advocate. versus DEENA NATH AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. A.K. Trivedi & Mr. Ashok K. Vij, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): Union of India, through General Manager, Northern Railway, impugns order dated 18th May, 2015 whereby OA No.4225/2013 filed by Deena Nath and Ram Garib, the respondents herein has been allowed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) and the orders dated 27th January, 2012 and 5th May, 2010 reducing the salary of the respondents have been quashed. It has been also directed that the amounts recovered from the respondents would be paid back to the W.P. (C) 10137/2015 Page 1 of 7 respondents within one mont...
- ‹ Prev
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- Next ›
- Last »