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.
North East Region Finservice Limited vs.oriental Bank of Commerce
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2017
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 834/2017 & CMs No.3805 & 3806/2017 NORTH EAST REGION FINSERVICE LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Mr. Rudra Nath Sinha, Ms. Rashmita Roy Choudhury, Mr. Lokesh Chopra, Advocates. versus ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE .... Respondent Through: Ms. Ekta Sikri, Ms. Adwaita Sharma, Advocates along with Mr. Ashok K. Sharma, AGM/AR of the respondent/Bank CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER3001.2017 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for issuance of a writ of mandamus to the respondent for granting it further time to sell the property proposed to be auctioned by them in terms of the order dated 21.5.2016 passed by the Lok Adalat wherein the parties had arrived at a settlement.2. Ms. Sikri, learned counsel who appears on an advance notice states on instructions that the settlement had fallen through on account of failure on the part of the petitioner to abide by the underta...
Hsil Limited vs.marvel Ceramics and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2017
% + *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:30. h January, 2017. CS(COMM) No.1382/2016, IA No.1195/2017 (of the defendant no.2 under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC) and IA No.1198/2017 (of defendants no.1 to 3 under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC). HSIL LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Manav Gupta with Ms. Esha Dutta, Mr. Sahil Garg and Ms. Ridhi Munjal, Advs. versus MARVEL CERAMICS AND ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Tejas Patel with Ms. Meera Kaura Patel and Ms. Shivani Singh, Advs. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW IA No.1196/2017 and IA No.1197/2017 (of the defendants no.1 to 3 under Order VII Rule 10 and Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) respectively).1. These applications have come up today for the first time. The counsel for the plaintiff appears on advance notice.2. Considering the nature of the applications, which have to be decided on the basis of the contents of the plaint and the documents of the plaintiff, need to call for rep...
Ram Niwas Gupta vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2017
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI BAIL APPLN. 140/2017 & Crl.M.A. No.1315/2017 Date of Decision:30. h January, 2017 RAM NIWAS GUPTA ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Rakesh Kumar Khanna, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Ashutosh Dubey, Adv. & Mr.Abhishek Chauhan, Adv. STATE versus ..... Respondent Through Mr.Ashish Dutta, APP for the State with Mr.Rishi Pal, DCP, Outer District, Mr.Arvind Kumar, SHO & SI Amit. Mr.Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Sidharth Chopra, Adv. & Mr.Dinesh Jindal, Complainant in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S. TEJI, J1 The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been preferred by the applicant in a case arising out of FIR No.17lodged on 30th September, 2014 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Mangolpuri. Bail Application No.140/2017 Page 1 of 8 2. The facts as emerge from the records, are that the complainant Saroj Jindal lodged an FIR against the applicant M...
Gauhar Hussain vs.mumtaz Ara
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2017
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:18. h January, 2017 Decided on:30. h January, 2017 CRL.M.C. 93/2010 & Crl.M.As.2052/2010, 6786/2010, 13010/2015, 10375/2015 and 2411/2016 GAUHAR HUSSAIN ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Ravi Prakash Mehrotra with Mr. Vibhu Tiwari, Advs. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUMTAZ ARA Represented by: Mr. Ashok Gurnani, Adv. SI Vivek, PS Chandni Mahal. ..... Respondent 1. A petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed by the respondents Mumtaj Ara and Tania Gauhar, daughter of the petitioner and respondent. Vide order dated 27th October, 2007, learned Metropolitan Magistrate considering the rival contentions of the parties and the legal position on the issue directed the petitioner to pay interim maintenance of 2500/- per month to each of the two respondents from the date of filing of the petition till its disposal. Learned Trial Court came to the conclusion as under- . Heard, the arguments on behalf of both the pa...
Uoi & Anr. Vs.amardeep Kaur & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2017
$~R-214 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: January 30, 2017 + UOI & ANR. MAC.APP. 279/2009 Through: Dr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Advocate ....Appellants versus AMARDEEP KAUR & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vivek Sharma and Mr. Nishant, Advocates for respondents No.1 & 2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % (ORAL) JUDGMENT Impugned Award of 9th July, 2008 grants compensation of `10,50,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum to respondents-claimants on account of death of one Harjit Singh aged about 49 years in a road accident on 14th November, 2006. The facts of this case are already noted in the impugned Award and so, need no reproduction. Suffice to note that Harjit Singh was driving a two-wheeler scooter and was purportedly hit from behind by Balero Jeep, which is owned by appellant. The injuries suffered by scooterist in the accident in question proved fatal. The deceased in a private employment was earning `19,100/- per month and is survived by his wife and ...
Union Public Service Commission vs.khetrabasi Biswal & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.6016/2014 Reserved on:17. h November, 2016 % Date of Decision:30. h January, 2017 UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ....Petitioner Through: Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate. Versus KHETRABASI BISWAL & ANR. ..Respondents Through: Mr. G.K. Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. Sumant Bhushan, Advocate for Mr. Akshay Makhija, CGSC CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR CHANDER SHEKHAR, J.This writ petition is directed against the order dated 27.2.2014 in OA No.3893/2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as CAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi.2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the CAT, vide order dated 27.2.2014 in OA No.3893/2012, has directed the petitioner Union Public Service Commission - to treat the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) of the applicant for the year 2006-2007 as Very Good and promote the WP(C) No.6016/2014 Page 1 of 11 off...
Shri Ramesh Kumar and Ors. Vs.the Director of Education and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % SHRI RAMESH KUMAR AND ORS. 30th January, 2017 ........ Petitioners W.P.(C) No.5786/2015 Through: None. versus THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Satyakam, ASC for respondent No.1. Mr. Pramod Gupta, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3. Mr. Anil Kumar, L.A. Zone-21. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. In this writ petition, a detailed order was passed on 29.5.2015 when notices were issued in the writ petition and interim stay granted with respect to only certain petitioners. This order dated 29.5.2015 reads as under:-"C.M. No.10408/2015 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. + W.P.(C) No.5786/2015 and C.M. No.10409/2015 (stay) W.P.(C) No.5786/2015 Page 1 of 6 2. There are a total of 43 petitioners in this case. All the 43 petitioners claim that they are employees of the respondent no.2-sch...
Genesis Ecotech Private Limited vs.alp Aeroflex India Private Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CO. APPL. (M) 165/2016 IN THE MATTER OF: Order Reserved on:09. 12.2016 Order Delivered on:30. 01.2017 GENESIS ECOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED ...Applicant/Transferor Company AND ALP AEROFLEX INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Through: Mr. Hemant Sharma, Mr. Palash Non-Applicant/Transferee Company Agarwal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.1. The present application has been filed, under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by Genesis Ecotech Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Transferor Company) in connection with the Scheme of Amalgamation (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme) of the Transferor Company with ALP Aeroflex India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferee Company). CO.APPL.(M) 165/2016 Page 1 of 7 2. The registered offices of the Transferor Company as well as the Transferee Company are situated in the National Capital Territory of Delhi, wi...
Yogender vs.state (Nct of Delhi) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2017
+ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 318/2017 Date of Hearing & Order: January 30th, 2017 YOGENDER ........ Petitioner Through Ms.Richa Sharma, Adv. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondent Through Mr.Sudershan Joon, APP with SI Naresh Kumar, PS Karol Bagh. Respondent no.2 in person with Mr.Nabendu Eshore, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sh. Yogendra for quashing of FIR No.45/2014 dated 20.01.2014, under Section 323/341/354/354D/451/5IPC registered at Police Station Karol Bagh on the basis of an amicable settlement executed between petitioner and respondent no.2 namely, Smt. Hema.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. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Crl.M.C. 318/2017 Page 1 of 7 3. The factual matrix of the present cas...
Pawan vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2017
* % + + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:4. h January, 2017 Decided on:30. h January, 2017 CRL.A. 1205/2016 PAWAN STATE Represented by: Mr. M.P. Sharma, Advocate. ..... Appellant versus ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the CRL.A. 1206/2016 State with ASI Prem Chand, PS Ali Pur. DURGA STATE Represented by: Mr. M.P. Sharma, Advocate. ..... Appellant versus ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the CRL.A. 1207/2016 State with ASI Prem Chand, PS Ali Pur. ..... Appellant RAJINDER KUMAR @ AMAN Represented by: Mr. M.P. Sharma, Advocate. STATE versus ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the CRL.A. 1212/2016 State with ASI Prem Chand, PS Ali Pur. CRL.A. Nos. 1205/2016, 1206/2016, 1207/2016, 1212/2016 Page 1 of 7 SUNNY STATE Represented by: Mr. M.P. Sharma, Advocate. ..... Appellant versus ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Ashok K. Garg, APP for the State with ASI Prem Chand, PS Ali Pur. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. J...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »