Delhi Court October 2017 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2017 Page 57 of about 590 results (0.018 seconds)National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. V ...
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:09. 10. 2017 $~OS-31 * % + O.M.P. (COMM) 360/2017 and IA No.11328/2017 (stay) NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA LTD. ........ Petitioner Through Mr. A.K.Thakur, Mr.R.K.Mishra and Mr.Rishi Raj, Advs. versus BANACO OVERSEAS ..... Respondent Through Mr.K.Singhal and Mr.Siddharth Mittal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition is filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) seeking to impugn the Award dated 24.05.2017 passed by the learned Arbitrator.2. The facts relevant for the disposal of this petition, briefly stated are that the Government of India under an obligation with WTO to import specified quantity of Maize (Popcorn) reduced custom duty on the product from 15% to 0% vide Custom Notification dated 25.01.2007. Only designated State Trading Enterprises (STE) including the petitioner were to a...
Tag this Judgment!Manmohan Singh vs.ashok Rana & Ors
Court: Delhi
$~ * + Sinha, Mr. Anirudh Chadha and Mr. Arjun Nanda, Advocates ..... Defendants versus ASHOK RANA & ORS IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 3466/2015 & I.A. 26169/2015 MANMOHAN SINGH ..... Plaintiff Through Mr. Sumeer Sodhi with Mr. Amitabh Through Mr. B.S. Randhawa, Advocate for D-1. Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, D-2 in person. Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate for D-8, 9, 13, 18, 19, 24 and 25. Defendant No.8 in person. % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN Date of Decision:09. h October, 2017 JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (Oral): Present suit has been filed for permanent and mandatory injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff and further restraining the defendants from dispossessing the plaintiff without due process of law. By virtue of order dated 25th September, 2017, defendant nos. 3, 4, 5 to 7, 10 to 12, 14 to 17 and 20 to 23 were proceeded ex-parte. CS (OS) 3466/2015 Page 1 of 6 During the pendency of the present suit, a writ petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Naresh Chand Jain vs.habib Alam @ Tinku & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-286 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:9. h October, 2017 + MAC APPEAL272011 NARESH CHAND JAIN ..... Appellant Through: None. versus HABIB ALAM @ TINKU & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Pankaj Seth, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant was the claimant before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, he having filed the accident claim petition (Suit No.98/2009) on 02.06.2005, alongside another claim petition (Suit No.99/2009) filed by his wife, both having suffered injuries in the same motor vehicle accident which had occurred on 27.02.2005 at about 8:30 PM, proven at the Tribunal to have been caused due to negligent driving of motor cycle bearing registration No.DL-7S V- 9401 admittedly insured against third party risk for the period in question with the third respondent (insurer). The Tribunal, by judgment dated 25.08.2010, upheld the case for compensation on the principle of fault liability and awarded total compens...
Tag this Judgment!Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.shishupal & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-298 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC APPEAL1082011 Decided on:09. h October, 2017 IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. .... Appellant Through: Mr. Pankaj Gupta for Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate versus SHISHUPAL & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) by its judgment dated 06.12.2010 on accident claim case (MACT8412010) instituted on 22.09.2007 by the first and second respondents (collectively, the claimants) awarded compensation on account of the death of Ranjeet in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 13.09.2007 involving use of three-wheeler scooter bearing registration no.DL-1RF-5320 (TSR), fastening the liability on the appellant / insurance company (insurer). It may be mentioned here that the claim petition was filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 based on the averments that the deceased was an auto mechanic who had taken out the TS...
Tag this Judgment!Ajit Singh vs.govt of Nct of Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: October 09, 2017 + W.P.(C) 8718/2016 & C.M. 35768/2016 AJIT SINGH + W.P.(C) 8719/2016 & C.M. 35769/2016 MEER SINGH Through: Mr. Rajesh Yadav & Mr. Lalit Kumar Rawal, Advocates ........ Petitioners Versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Siddharth Panda, Advocate for LAC/L & B in W.P.(C) 8718/2016 Mr. Rajesh Sharma, Advocate for LAC/L & B in W.P.(C) 8719/2016 Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Ms. Akshita Manocha & Ms. Kajri Gupta, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioners claim the relief of declaration under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short the New Act) that acquisition in respect of suit lands i.e. Khasra No.273, 278 & 282, total measuring 10 bighas and 06 biswas (out of which petitioners claim share to the extent...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Singh vs.prem Singh
Court: Delhi
* + % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.735/2017 RFA No.736/2017 Reserved on:26. h September, 2017 Pronounced on:9. h October, 2017 RFA No.735/2017 and C.M. Appl. Nos. 29740-42/2017 HARI SINGH PREM SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Advocate. versus ..... Respondent + RFA No.736/2017 and C.M. Appl. Nos. 29745-47/2017 AKHILESH SINGH ..... Appellant PREM SINGH Through: Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Advocate. versus ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J1 Two Regular First Appeals under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) are being disposed of by this common judgment. The impugned judgments of the trial court are dated 10.6.2016 (RFA No.735/2017) and 12.7.2016 (RFA No.736/2017) by RFA Nos. 735-36/2017 Page 1 of 6 which the leave to defendant applications under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) CPC of the appellants have been dismissed and the money recovery suits for Rs.6,80,000/- and ...
Tag this Judgment!State vs.varun Verma
Court: Delhi
$~4 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: October 09, 2017 CRL.REV.P. 557/2017 STATE ........ Petitioner Through: Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State with SI Manju, PS JAnak Puri. versus VARUN VERMA Respondent Through : Ms.Yashima Sharma, Advocate. PRATIBHA RANI, J.(Oral) 1. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 20th March, 2017 whereby respondent/accused person has been discharged in case FIR No.1622/2015 under Section 376/328/323/506 IPC, PS Janak Puri, the State has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to set aside the order on discharge.2. Before the learned Trial Court, the respondent/accused sought his discharge on the grounds which are recorded in para 5 of the impugned order as under:-"5. Ld. Counsel for the accused has contended that accused has been falsely implicated in this case. She withdrew her complaint on 6.12.2015 and also refused to undergo her internal medical examination when she was taken to hospital on 6.12.2015. ...
Tag this Judgment!Anand Mishra vs.prem Kumar & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-289 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:9. h October, 2017 + MAC APPEAL No.62/2011 ANAND MISHRA ..... Appellant Through: None. versus PREM KUMAR & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Arun Yadav, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant, then aged 26 years, while moving on his bicycle to distribute newspapers to earn his livelihood, suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that occurred on 24.04.2009 involving negligent driving of truck bearing registration No.MP17 5736. On his claim petition (MACT No.34/2009), the motor accident claims tribunal, by judgment dated 21.10.2010, found a case made out for compensation to be awarded holding the truck driver responsible. Compensation in the total sum of Rs. 2,82,960/- was awarded, the liability to pay having been fastened on the third respondent (insurer) of the truck, the amount having been calculated thus:-"MAC Appeal No.62/2011 Page 1 of 4 2. S.No.Heads Compensation ...
Tag this Judgment!Jagbeer Singh vs.shiv Kumar & Anr.
Court: Delhi
$~R-293 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:9. h October, 2017 + MAC APPEAL822011 JAGBEER SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Adarsh Nain Sabharwal, versus Adv. SHIV KUMAR & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Vandana Surana, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant, then 29 years old, earning his livelihood as a driver, suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 26.06.2001 due to negligent driving of truck bearing registration No.HR38D6467admittedly insured against the third party risk with the third respondent (insurer). On his claim petition (Suit No.436/2002), instituted on 14.08.2002, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal upheld his case for compensation, by judgment dated 09.09.2010, and awarded Rs.2,31,783/- as compensation fastening the liability to pay on third respondent with interest @ 7.5% per annum calculating it thus: MAC Appeal No.82/2011 Page 1 of 3 Treatment expenses Pain and sufferings: Conv...
Tag this Judgment!Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited vs.hrcn Cable Network
Court: Delhi
$~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 48/2015 SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED Through: Mr. Pravin Anand with ..... Plaintiff Ms. Prachi Agarwal, Advocate with Ms. Minali Menon, Advocate. versus HRCN CABLE NETWORK Through None Date of Decision:9. h October, 2017 ..... Defendant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement of copyright, rendition of accounts, delivery up, damages etc. The prayer clause in the plaint is reproduced hereinbelow:-"(i) An order of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant, their officers, servants, agents, partners and representatives and all others acting for and on their behalf from either engaging in themselves or from authorizing, the recording, distributing, broadcasting, public performance/communication to the public or in any other way exploiting the cinematograph films, sound recordings and/or literary works (lyrics)...
Tag this Judgment!