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.
Vijay Kumar Singh vs.state (Nct of Delhi) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2017
+ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 39/2017 Date of Hearing & Order: January 16th, 2017 VIJAY KUMAR SINGH ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Ramesh Pandey, Adv. with petitioner in person. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondent Through Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, APP with SI Pancham Kumar, PS Saket. Respondent no.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.(Oral) The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by 1. the petitioner, namely, Sh. Vijay Kumar Singh for quashing of FIR No.320/2015 dated 13.03.2015, under Section 354D/506/509 IPC registered at Police Station, Saket on the basis of an amicable settlement between petitioner and respondent no.2 namely, Smt. Sangeeta.2. respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2 present in the Court has been Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Crl.M.C. 39/2017 Page 1 of 7 identified to be the complainant/first-informant in the FIR in question by SI Pancham Kumar.3. The factual matrix of...
Lionforge Intertrade Private Limited vs.perpetual Capital Servicing Pr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order reserved on:28. 11.2016 Order delivered on:16.01.2017 CO. APPL. (M) 161/2016 IN THE MATTER OF: LIONFORGE INTERTRADE PRIVATE LIMITED Applicant/Transferor Company AND PERPETUAL CAPITAL SERVICING PRIVATE LIMITED Applicant/Transferee Company Through: Mr. Manik Dogra, Advocate with Mr. Siddharth Das, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.CO. APPL. 4702/2016 (Exemption) Exemption granted, subject to all just exemptions. The application is disposed of accordingly. CO. APPL. (M) 161/2016 1. The present is an application filed jointly, under Sections 391 & 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) read with Rules 6 CO.APPL.(M) 161/2016 Page 1 of 1 & 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, by Lionforge Intertrade Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferor Company) and Perpetual Capital Servicing Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferee Company) in connection with...
Mahesh Kumar & Ors. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2017
$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : JANUARY16 2017 CRL.M.C.170/2017 & Crl.M.A.788/2017 MAHESH KUMAR & ORS. Through : Mr.J.P.Malviya, Advocate. ........ Petitioners versus ........ RESPONDENTS STATE & ANR. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG Through : Mr.Arun Kr.Sharma, APP. SI Mahipal Singh, P.S. Ghazipur + S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of FIR No.266/2011 registered under Section 3IPC at Police Station Ghazipur. It is stated that the matter has been settled between the petitioner and respondent No.2 amicably.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. On perusal of the file, it reveals that similar petition Crl.M.C.No.1848/2016 was earlier filed by the petitioners for the same purpose and by a detailed order dated 13.05.2016, it was dismissed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. The petitioners again preferred another Crl.M.C.No.4395/2016 for q...
Vivek Kaushik vs.vikram Kaushik & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI VIVEK KAUSHIK Date of Decision : January 16, 2017 RFA(OS) 41/2015 ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Joydeep Sarma, Advocate $~8 * % + versus VIKRAM KAUSHIK & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Represented by: Mr.Sunil Aggarwal, Advocate with Mr.Arjun Mitra, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Late Sh.Hem Chandra Kaushik was admittedly the owner of property bearing Municipal No.L-19, Lajpat Nagar-III, Delhi-110024. Flat No.1402, Marathon Galaxy-I, IBS Marg, Mulund Mumbai. Agricultural land ad- measuring about 10 acres in V&PO Shedawa District, Bulandshahar, UP. Ownership was reflected in the title document and revenue as well as municipal record.2. It is the common case of parties that Hem Chandra Kaushik died intestate on August 10, 2008. His wife Late Smt.Mahalakshmi had pre- deceased him on November 15, 1997. His two sons Vikram and Vivek and daughter Jyotsana were his su...
Dr. Naresh Pal Singh Bhati vs.sardar Patel Senior Secondary Public Sch ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2017
* + % W.P.(C) No.3912/2004 DR. NARESH PAL SINGH BHATI IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI16h January, 2017 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Ralli, Advocate with Mr. Trinayan Sonowal, Advocate. versus SARDAR PATEL SENIOR SECONDARY PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. U.C. Chaudhary, Advocate with Mr. Vipin Chaudhary, Advocate with respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Ashwani Garg, Advocate for respondent No.4. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/Dr. Naresh Pal Singh Bhati impugns the judgment of the Delhi School Tribunal (DST) dated 10.7.2003 by which the DST has dismissed the appeal filed by the present petitioner before the DST challenging the order of his termination of services dated 8.1.1998.... Petitioner was served the impugned order of termination of services dated W.P.(C) No.3912/200...
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd...... Vs.shilpa Sharma & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2017
$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:16. h January, 2017 + MAC.APP. 373/2014 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD...... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajeev M. Roy, Adv. versus SHILPA SHARMA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, Adv. for R-1 to R-3. 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.39,79,000/- has been awarded to claimants/respondents no.1 to 3.2. The accident dated 15th June, 2013 resulted in the death of Vipin Sharma. The deceased was aged 30 years at the time of the accident and was survived by his widow, minor son and mother who filed the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal. The deceased was working as a team leader with Ahuja Vegetable Store in INA Market, New Delhi earning Rs.20,300/- per month which was duly proved by his employer PW-2. The Claims Tribunal took the income of the deceased as Rs.19,500/- per month, added 5...
Neelam Soni vs.atin Singhal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2017
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:16. 01.2017 CM(M) 1211/2016 & CM Nos.43939-43940/2016 NEELAM SONI Through Mr.M.S.Oberoi and Mr.Gaurav Rohilla, Advs. ........ Petitioner versus ATIN SINGHAL ..... Respondent Through CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. By the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 2.7.2015 by which order the appeal filed by the petitioner before the Additional Rent Control Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as The ARCT) was dismissed.2. The respondent filed an Eviction Petition under section 14(1)(a) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (DRC Act) for property No.L-65, Mahabir Nagar Extension, Nangli Jalab, New Delhi. The petitioner was said to be the tenant of the first floor of the said property as described in the site plan. The property was said to have been let out to the petitioner in August 2013 for residential purpose at a monthly rent of...
Sojourner Bpo Private Limited vs.unicure India Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order reserved on:07. 12.2016 Order delivered on:16.01.2017 CO. APPL. (M) 152/2016 IN THE MATTER OF: SOJOURNER BPO PRIVATE LIMITED ... Transferor Company/Applicant WITH UNICURE INDIA LIMITED Transferee Company/Non-Applicant Through: Mr. Advocate. Kunal Sabharwal, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.1. The present is an application filed, under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) read with Rules 9 and 69 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, by Sojourner BPO Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferor Company/Applicant), in connection with the proposed Scheme of Amalgamation (hereinafter referred to as proposed scheme) between the Transferor Company/Applicant and Unicure India Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferee Company). CO.APPL.(M) 152/2016 Page 1 of 1 2. It has been stated by learned counsel for the Transferor Company/Applicant that the Transferor...
Abdul Kalam vs.state ( Nct of Delhi) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2017
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + DECIDED ON : JANUARY16 2017 CRL.M.C. 4838/2014 & CRL.M.A.No.166ABDUL KALAM ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.Arun K.Sinha, Advocate. versus STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of the FIR No.380/2014 under Section 363/366/376 IPC and Section 4 of POSCO Act registered at Police Station Patel Nagar. Status report is on record.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. The present case was registered on the complaint of Xs (assumed name) father. He lodged complaint on 11.6.2014 reporting that his daughter X was missing. He suspected petitioners involvement in her Crl.M.C.4838/2014 Page 1 of 3 disappearance. FIR was registered under Section 363 IPC. Subsequently the prosecutrix was recovered. Her statement under Se...
Shailendra Pathak vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-2017
* + % SHAILENDRA PATHAK UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.7169/2011 16th January, 2017 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajan Mani, Advocate. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj, CGSC for respondent No.1. Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Advocate respondent Nos.3 and 5. for 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/Sh. Shailendra Pathak seeks appointment to the post of Assistant Registrar with the respondent no.2/University of Delhi.... Petitioner seeks appointment to the post of Assistant Registrar with the respondent no.2/University of Delhi under the Persons with Disabilities (PWD) quota. Also, it is not that the petitioner seeks appointment to the post under the PWD quota on the ground that he has been wrongly not selected, bec...
- ‹ Prev
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- Next ›
- Last »