Delhi Court October 2017 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2017 Page 54 of about 590 results (0.018 seconds)Nisha & Ors. Vs.united India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-304 & 305 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:10. h October, 2017 + MAC APPEAL No.161/2011 RAJ KUMAR MALIK ..... Appellant Through: None. versus UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Priyadarsi Acharya for Mr. K.L. Nandwani, Adv. for R-1. + MAC APPEAL No.162/2011 NISHA & ORS. Through: None. versus ..... Appellants UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Priyadarsi Acharya for Mr. K.L. Nandwani, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. On 12.06.2006, a motor vehicular accident took place involving two vehicles, one Chevrolet Tavera (SUV) bearing registration No.DL1J4092and, the other, a bus of the Delhi Transport Corporation MAC Appeal No.161 & 162 of 2011 Page 1 of 6 (DTC) bearing registration No.DL PA3037 Several persons suffered injuries including Raj Kumar Malik and Rajiv Chopra, the latter having died. Ten accident claim cases came to be instituted on 19.07.2008 bef...
Tag this Judgment!Yashoda vs.tata Power Delhi Distribution Limited
Court: Delhi
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on 10th October, 2017 + W.P.(C) 1790/2015 YASHODA Through Mr. Ashutosh Lohia, Ms. Pragya Sriastava and Mr. Armaan Grover, Advs. ........ Petitioner versus TATA POWER DELHI DISTRIBUTION LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Mr. Manish Srivastava and Mr. Harsh Prakash, Advs. for TPDDL/R-1. Mr. Ajjay Aroraa, Adv. for NDMC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA JUDGMENT A. K. CHAWLA, J.(ORAL)... Petitioner, who is resident of Khasra No.14/15, Bhagat Colony, A-2 Block, West Sant Nagar, Burari, Delhi -110084 in short the subject premises, seeks issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to the respondent-TPDDL for installation of a permanent electricity connection.2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of the the subject premises and a temporary electricity connection for residential purposes was provided at the time of beginning of construction on 5.12.2012 and that, though, on 5.10.2013, the W.P.(C) 1790/2015...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital vs.gorkha Security Services
Court: Delhi
$~OS-45 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:, 10.10.2017 O.M.P. (COMM) 363/2017 DR. BABA SAHEB AMBEDKAR HOSPITAL........ Petitioner Through Mr.Sanjoy Ghose and Mr.Rhishabh Jetley, Advs. for GNCTD versus GORKHA SECURITY SERVICES ..... Respondent Through Mr.Onkar Nath, Adv.for respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) IA No.11454/2017 (delay in filing the petition) For the reasons stated in the application the delay in filing the petition is condoned. Application stands disposed of. IA No.11457/2017 (delay in re-filing the petition) For the reasons stated in the application the delay in re-filing the petition is condoned. Application is disposed of. O.M.P. (COMM) 363/2017 & IA No.11455/2017 (stay) 1. This petition is filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to impugn the Award dated 31.3.2017 passed by the learned Arbitrator. Some of the relevant facts are that the petitioner awarded a contract t...
Tag this Judgment!Dev Bhushan Since Deceased Thr Lrs vs.pradeep Kumar
Court: Delhi
$~6 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:10. 10.2017 CM(M) 1274/2012 & C.M. Nos.19770/2012, 16384-16385/2015 DEV BHUSHAN SINCE DECEASED THR LRS ......... Petitioner Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Nittin Bhatia, Ms. Sahiba Pantel & Mr. Rijul Taneja, Advocates. versus PRADEEP KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S.S. Jain & Ms. Veena Rupana, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. Present petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to impugn the order dated 11.10.2012 passed by the Rent Control Tribunal(hereinafter referred to as the RCT).2. By the impugned order, the RCT set aside the order of the Additional Rent Controller (in short the ARC) whereby the ARC had dismissed the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC and upheld that the service has been duly affected on the respondent while passing the ex-parte eviction order dated 15.10.2005.3. The case of the petitioner is that the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Subhash Chand & Anr. Vs.the State & Ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % SUBHASH CHAND & ANR. FAO No.1/2017 10th October, 2017 Mr. Vijay Kishan Advocate. ..... Appellants Jetley, Through: versus THE STATE & ORS. Through: Mr. Parmod Kumar Singhal, ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA Adv. for R-2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the appellants argues two aspects for challenging the impugned judgment dated 15.9.2016 passed by the trial court granting letters of administration with respect to a Will registered on 3.6.1993 of late Smt. Gobindi Devi.2. The first aspect which is argued is that Smt. Gobindi Devi was not the owner of that share of H.No.230, Gali no.11, Anand Parbat, Delhi-5 as mentioned in the Will because she was the owner in FAO No.1/2017 Page 1 of 4 fact only of a lesser share, and therefore, the letters of administration could not have been granted.3. Secondly it is argued that the grant of letters of administration i...
Tag this Judgment!State (Nct of Delhi) vs.shakeel
Court: Delhi
$~4 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: October 10, 2017 CRL.L.P. 439/2017 STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ........ Petitioner Through: Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State with SI Pankaj Kumar PS Vasant Kunj South versus SHAKEEL ..... Respondent Through: Mr.R.S.Mishra & Mr.Anand Mishra, Advocates PRATIBHA RANI, J.(Oral) 1. The State is seeking leave to appeal against judgment dated 19th March, 2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-01 in Sessions Case No.1whereby the respondent Shakeel has been acquitted of the charges under Section 451/354D/506 IPC and Sectionof POCSO Act.2. Notice of the leave petition was sent to the respondent and the LCR was also requisitioned.3. The grievance of the State is that the victim in this case was thirteen year old girl who was staying with her maternal uncle at Delhi. The respondent/accused Shekeel entered her room on 18th July, 2014 at 8:00 AM and tried to hold the hand of PW-3 F (name CRL.L.P. 439/2017 Page 1 of 9 withheld to concea...
Tag this Judgment!Balvinder Singh & Ors vs.the State
Court: Delhi
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2557/2017 BALVINDER SINGH & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Bhagat Singh, Advocate along with petitioners in person. versus THE STATE ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Sanjay Lao, ASC for State with SI Vinay Sangwan, PS Khyala, Delhi. Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL % ORDER1010.2017 1. Status report has been handed over in the court by learned ASC, which is taken on record.2. Respondent No.2 appears in person and accepts notice. He is duly identified by IO SI Vinay Sangwan.3. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.PC) for quashing of the FIR bearing No.522/2016, registered against them on 28.12.2016 with Police Station Khyala, District West, Delhi, under W.P. (Crl.) No.2557/2017 Page 1 of 3 Sections 3IPC on the complaint of respondent No.2....
Tag this Judgment!National Projects Construction Corporation vs.royal Construction Co. P ...
Court: Delhi
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:10. h October, 2017 CS(COMM) No.188/2017 NATIONAL PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION .... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Anup J.Bhambhani, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rajat Arora & Mr. Jaypreet Singh, Advs.. Versus ROYAL CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD. ...Defendant Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The plaintiff, a Government of India enterprise, has instituted this suit, pleading i) that the plaintiff was awarded certain construction works by the State Organization for Food Industry, Baghdad, Iraq; ii) that the plaintiff, vide Agreement dated 29th June, 1982 appointed the defendant as a sub-contractor / associate of the plaintiff for execution of part of the aforesaid works; iii) that owing to certain disputes that arose between the plaintiff and the defendant, the defendant, invoked the arbitration clause in terms of its agreement with the plaintiff, and in which arbitration proceedings, the plaintiff, besides filing ...
Tag this Judgment!Parsvnath Developers Limited & Another vs.rail Land Development Author ...
Court: Delhi
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + OMP (MISC.) (COMM.) 34/2017 Judgment delivered on:10. 10.2017 PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LIMITED & ANOTHER ........ Petitioners versus RAIL LAND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners For the Respondent : Mr Rahul Malhotra and Mr Shubham Paliwal : Mr Shaurya Sahay, CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1010.2017 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) IA No.11624/ 2017(exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 34/2017 1. This is a petition under Section 29A of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking extension of time for making the Award. O.M.P.(Misc.) (COMM.) 34/2017 Page 1 of 2 2. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the arbitration proceedings have been diligently prosecuted by them.3. It is further submitted that delay has not occurred for any reasons attributable to the Arbitral Tribunal.4. It is contended that the final arguments...
Tag this Judgment!Dheeraj Kumar Jatav vs.charan Singh & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-296 & 297 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:10. h October, 2017 + MAC APPEAL972011 BABY KOTIL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate versus CHARAN SINGH & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Adv for R-3. + MAC APPEAL982011 and CM175602011 DHEERAJ KUMAR JATAV ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate versus CHARAN SINGH & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Adv. for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellants in these two appeals arising out of the same motor vehicular accident are cousins. While Dheeraj Kumar Jatav (appellant in MACA982011) was 15 years old and riding the bicycle, Kotil (appellant in MACA972011) was his cousin sister, aged 9 years, riding on the pillion of the said bicycle. On 25.09.2005 at about MACA9798/2011 Page 1 of 4 4.30 p.m. in the area of Main Road Bus Stand, Khera Khurd, Delhi, their bicycle was hit by a truck bearing registration no.RJ-02-G...
Tag this Judgment!