Delhi Court January 2017 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.
Icici Bank Ltd vs.phool Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2017
$~A-46 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:27. 01.2017 + CM(M) 88/2017 and CM No.3004/2017 ICICI BANK LTD PHOOL SINGH Through versus Through ........ Petitioner Mr.Puneet K.Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla, Advs ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) CM No.3004/2017 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM(M) 88/2017 1. An advance copy of the petition has been sent to the respondent but none is present on behalf of the respondent.2. By the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks to impugn the order dated 03.01.2017 of the trial court by which summons were issued in the suit and arguments were heard on the application under Order 40 Rule 1 CPC for appointment of Receiver for the hypothecated vehicle but no orders were passed in the same.3. The petitioner has filed a suit for recovery of Rs.3,00,760.39/-. It is Page 1 of 5 stated that the respondent had approache...
Icici Bank Ltd vs.rekha Agarwal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2017
$~A-54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:27. 01.2017 + CM(M) 100/2017 and CM No.3047/2017 ICICI BANK LTD Through versus REKHA AGARWAL Through ........ Petitioner Mr.Puneet K.Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla, Advs ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) CM No.3048/2017 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM(M) 100/2017 1. An advance copy of the petition has been sent to the respondent but none is present on behalf of the respondent.2. By the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks to impugn the order dated 13.01.2017 of the trial court by which summons were issued in the suit and no orders were passed in the application filed by the petitioner for appointment of a receiver in taking the custody of the hypothecated vehicle.3. The petitioner has filed a suit for recovery of Rs.7,21,685.27/-. It is Page 1 of 5 stated that the respondent had approached the petiti...
Management of Modern Public School & Anr. Vs.presiding Officer, Delhi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.6873/2008 + % MANAGEMENT OF MODERN PUBLIC SCHOOL & ANR. ........ Petitioners 27th January, 2017 None. Through: versus PRESIDING OFFICER, DELHI SCHOOL TRIBUNAL & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Satyakam, 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. Though there are two petitioners in this case, effectively the petitioner is the Management of Modern Public School i.e the petitioner no.1.... Petitioners impugn the order of the Delhi School Tribunal dated 26.8.2008 by which the Delhi School Tribunal has accepted the appeal filed before it by the present respondent no.3/Sh. Anirudh Kumar Pandey and has directed reinstatement of the respondent no.3 with the petitioner no.1/school. The issue is as regards W.P.(C) No.6873/2008 Page 1 of 16 when the resignation given by the employee, which is the respondent no.3 in this case, became fina...
Aman Kumar Pandey vs.general Manager Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2017
$~5. * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.1611/2016 Date of decision:27. h January, 2017 AMAN KUMAR PANDEY ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Om Prakash, Advocate. versus GENERAL MANAGER MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM ........ RESPONDENTS LIMITED AND ANR. Through Mr. R. Sudhinder, Ms. Prerana Amitabh & Mr. Dattatray Vyas, Advocates for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): Aman Kumar Pandey, in this writ petition, has challenged the order dated 28th January, 2015 passed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) in OA No.2949/2014, Sushila Devi versus General Manager, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited and Chairman and Managing Director, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited. The petitioner was not a party to the said OA, which was filed by his mother Sushila Devi. The grievance of the petitioner is that the order dated 28th January, 2015 ...
Icici Bank Ltd vs.fajal Elahi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2017
$~A-47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:27. 01.2017 + CM(M) 89/2017 and CM No.3005/2017 ICICI BANK LTD FAJAL ELAHI Through versus Through ........ Petitioner Mr.Puneet K.Bhalla, Chetna Bhalla Advs ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) CM No.3005/2017 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM(M) 89/2017 1. An advance copy of the petition has been sent to the respondent but none is present on behalf of the respondent.2. By the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks to impugn the order dated 13.01.2017 of the trial court by which summons were issued in the suit and no orders were passed in the application filed by the petitioner for appointment of a receiver in taking the custody of the hypothecated vehicle.3. The petitioner has filed a suit for recovery of Rs.5,07,754.49/-. It is Page 1 of 5 stated that the respondent had approached the petitioner for ...
Icici Bank Ltd vs.jitin Sehgal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2017
$~A-62 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:27. 01.2017 + CM(M) 101/2017 and CM No.3170/2017 ICICI BANK LTD JITIN SEHGAL Through versus Through ........ Petitioner Mr.Puneet K.Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla, Advs ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) CM No.3170/2017 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM(M) 101/2017 1. An advance copy of the petition has been sent to the respondent but none is present on behalf of the respondent.2. By the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks to impugn the order dated 03.01.2017 of the trial court by which summons were issued in the suit and arguments were heard on the application under Order 40 Rule 1 CPC for appointment of Receiver for the hypothecated vehicle but no orders were passed in the same.3. The petitioner has filed a suit for recovery of Rs.5,10,977.04/-. It is Page 1 of 5 stated that the respondent had approa...
North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr vs.gaurav Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2017
$~10. * + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA9392016 and CM APPL. 44597/2016 NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR Through: Mr. Sunil Goel, Standing Counsel with Ms. Supreet Bimbra, Advocate ..... Appellants versus GAURAV GUPTA ..... Respondent Through: Respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER2701.2017 The respondent appears in person and hands over his driving license as proof of his identify, a copy whereof has been signed by him and placed on the record. He states that he is ready and willing to abide by the consent orders passed in the batch of matters relating to NrDMC, lead matter being RFA7862016.2. Accordingly, the present appeal is disposed of alongwith the pending application in terms of the consent order passed on 01.12.2016 in a batch of appeals preferred by the appellant/NrDMC, lead matter being RFA7862016, while leaving the parties to bear their own expenses. HIMA KOHLI, J JANUARY27 2017 rkb...
Jaya Mukherjee vs.siddhartha Mukherjee
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2017
$~21 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :27. h JANUARY, 2017 JAYA MUKHERJEE CRL.M.C. 873/2016 ........ Petitioner Through : Ms.Ritika Mitra, Advocate. versus SIDDHARTHA MUKHERJEE CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG Through : Mr.Vikas Sharma, Advocate. ..... Respondent S.P.GARG, J.(Oral) 1. Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated 15.02.2016 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate in Execution Petition Nos.102/2012, 16/2014, 44/2014 & 71/2015. Petition is contested by the respondent.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. During the course of arguments, it revealed that order dated 08.09.2008 was passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate in a complaint case under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act instituted by the petitioner against the respondent. The respon...
Universal Sompo Gen Ins Co Ltd vs.santosh Kumar & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:27. h January, 2017 $~29 * % + MAC.APP. 607/2015 UNIVERSAL SOMPO GEN INS CO LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Mohammed Mustafa, Adv. versus SANTOSH KUMAR & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Chandan Malik, Mr.Randeep Pundir, Advs. for Respondent no.1 along with respondent no.1 in person. 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.13,73,297/- has been awarded to respondent no.1.2. The accident dated 22nd December, 2012 resulted in grievous injuries to respondent no.1. Respondent no.1 who was driving the motor cycle hit the stationary truck bearing No.HR55-5737.3. The injuries suffered by respondent no.1 and the treatment taken underwent by him are as under:-"S.No.Date and description of Operation/ procedure 1st Operation (23.12.2012) (i) Days hospitalization of 22.12.2012 to Debriment with ligation of facial 2.1.2013 (12 days) ...
Icici Bank Ltd vs.thasim
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-2017
$~A-49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:27. 01.2017 + CM(M) 91/2017 and CM No.3008/2017 ICICI BANK LTD THASIM Through versus Through ........ Petitioner Mr.Puneet K.Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla, Advs ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) CM No.3008/2017 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM(M) 91/2017 1. An advance copy of the petition has been sent to the respondent but none is present on behalf of the respondent.2. By the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks to impugn the order dated 13.01.2017 of the trial court by which summons were issued in the suit and no orders were passed in the application filed by the petitioner for appointment of a receiver in taking the custody of the hypothecated vehicle.3. The petitioner has filed a suit for recovery of Rs.4,01,618.10/-. It is Page 1 of 5 stated that the respondent had approached the petitioner for ...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »