Delhi Court November 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.
Naresh Jain & Anr vs.the Competent Authority, Delhi Urban Shelter Impr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~15 * + W.P.(C) 9850/2016 & CM392122016 NARESH JAIN & ANR THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENT BOARD & ANR ........ Petitioners Through Mr Rajiv K. Garg, Mr Ashish Garg, Advocates. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr Satya Narayan Padhi, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Ms Mini Pushkarna, Standing Counsel for DUSIB with Ms Anushruti, Mr Vasundhara Nayyar, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER2711.2017 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioners have filed the present petition impugning an order dated 25.01.2016 passed by respondent no.1 (the Competent Authority, Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board and hereafter the Competent Authority) under Section 19 of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 (hereafter the Slum Act). By the impugned order, the Competent Authority has granted permission to respondent no.2 to initiate proceedings to evict the petitioners from the property occupied by them bearing No...
Krishan Sharma vs.raj Rani Bhardwaj & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
$~8 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:27. h November, 2017 CM(M) 90/2016 and CM No.2950/2016 (stay) KRISHAN SHARMA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. N.K. Kantwala, Adv. with Ms. Akanksha Jain and Ms. Sayli Petiwale, Advocates versus RAJ RANI BHARDWAJ & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Monica Kapoor, Advocate for R-1 & R-2. Ms. Prem Lata Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Advocate for R-4 & R-5. Ms. Chandrika Gupta, Adv. with Ms. Nisha Sharma, Adv. for R-8. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The respective shares of the parties to the partition suit (CS No.356/2013), pending on the file of the Court of Civil Judge-04, Central, Delhi, from which the present petition arises, have already crystallized in terms of the preliminary decree passed on 11.03.2003. The proceedings before the learned trial Court are presently at the stage of consideration of the final decree wherein, it seemingly having been found that the subject property cannot ...
Vimla Devi & Ors vs.harish Babu & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
$~ R-566 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:27. h November, 2017 + MAC. APPEAL No.851/2012 VIMLA DEVI & ORS ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Bhupesh Narula with Ms. Rinku Narula and Mr. Yogesh Narula, Advocates versus HARISH BABU & ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA None. Through: ..Respondents JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The accident claim case (Suit No.87/11), instituted by the appellants (collectively, the claimants) on 12.07.2011 resulted in judgment dated 25.04.2012 being passed whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation in the total sum of Rs.10,45,350/- with interest @ 7.5 % per annum in their favour on account of death of Vinod Sharma in a motor vehicular accident that occurred on 14.05.2011 due to negligent driving of motor vehicle described as one bearing registration No.HR- 63B-0987, admittedly insured against third party risk for the period in question with the third respondent (the insurer).2. By the appeal at hand, enhanced compensation is sought. It is pointed ou...
Anand Metfast Pvt. Ltd. (In Vol. Liqn) Vs.............
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
$~CP-47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of decision:27. 11.2017 CO.PET. 63/2017 ANAND METFAST PVT. LTD. (IN VOL. LIQN) ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Deepak Anand, Advocate on behalf of Official Liquidator. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a petition filed under Section 497(6) of the Companies Act, 1956 (herein referred to as the Act) by the Official Liquidator (OL), seeking for voluntary winding up of Anand Metfast Private Limited (herein referred to as the said company).2. The said Company was incorporated on 27.04.2001 under the provisions of the Act with the Registrar of Companies (ROC), having authorized share capital of Rs. 10,00,000/- divided into 1,00,000 equity shares of Rs. 10/- each.3. The registered office of the said company is situated within the territory of NCT of Delhi at 20B/5, Ground Floor, Desh Bandhu Gupta Road, Dev Nagar, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005.4. Pursuant to the provision of Section 484(1) of the Act...
Anant Raj Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs.sudershan Soni & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) No.980/2004 + % ANANT RAJ AGENCIES PVT. LTD. 27th November, 2017 ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Biji Rajesh, Advocate with Mr. Anivesh Bhardwaj, Advocate. versus SUDERSHAN SONI & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, Advocate with Ms. Sukanya Lal, Advocate and Ms. Bindiya Logawney, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) I.A. No.13912/2017 (condonation of delay) 1. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 14 days in filing the appeal is condoned. I.A. stands disposed of. O.A.No.153/2017(filed by the plaintiff against order dated 26.9.2017) 2. This chamber appeal is filed by the plaintiff in the suit impugning the order of the Joint Registrar dated 26.9.2017 by which the Joint Registrar has dismissed the I.A. No.13949/2016 filed by the CS(OS) No.980/2004 Page 1 of 7 plaintiff under Order VII Rule 14 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (C...
Manjit Singh Butalia vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
$~1 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % MANJIT SINGH BUTALIA Through :... Petitioner in person W.P.(C)No.9872/2017 ........ Petitioner Date of decision :27. h November, 2017 versus UNION OF INDIA Through : Mr. Dev P.Bhardwaj, CGSC for ..... Respondent R-1/UOI with Mr. Surender Kumar and Ms. Anubha Bhardwaj, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE1 This writ petition seeks a direction by this court to the respondents to fulfill its obligations in terms of the Genocide Convention and Treaty Laws, 1948 by having proper deterrent legislation for the offence of genocide. The writ petition has been filed without making any representation to the respondent. In any case, the writ would otherwise be not maintainable as this court does not have the power to issue directions to the respondent to effect any legislation. W.P.(C)No.9872/2017 Page 1 of 2 2. The petitioner, who appears in person, prays ...
Prem Chand Khemka vs.mayank Khemka
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:27. h November, 2017 CM(M) 1176/2017 and CM No.38090/2017 (stay) PREM CHAND KHEMKA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Saurabh Banerjee, Adv. with Mr. Bikram Singh & Mr. Dhruv Bose, Advocates versus MAYANK KHEMKA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) + 1. The petitioner is the defendant in Civil Suit (CS No.59114/2016) instituted by the respondent against him seeking recovery of Rs.11,43,893/-. Concededly, the summons of the suit were served and the petitioner appeared before the court of Additional District Judge on 19.12.2015. Admittedly, pleadings in the nature of written statement came on record on 01.03.2016. Though at one stage, the respondent (plaintiff of the suit) had also taken the position that the filing of the written statement was belated and unauthorized, there being no prayer made for enlargement of the time for such purpose, the matter stood resolved by...
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.tarun Jain & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
$~R-569 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:27. h November, 2017 + MAC.APP. 882/2012 and CM APPL.13995/2012 (stay) BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Nemo. Versus TARUN JAIN & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) The first respondent (claimant), then aged 19 years, suffered 1. injuries in a motor vehicular accident that occurred on 21.06.2010 due to negligent driving of Innova car bearing registration no.KA-03-ME- 8316, which was admittedly insured against third party risk for the period in question with appellant (insurer). On his accident claim case (MACT No.35/2011) instituted on 28.01.2011, the tribunal held inquiry and, by judgment dated 14.05.2012, awarded total compensation in the sum of Rs.4,33,871/-, calculating it thus:-"Heads Sl. No.1. Medical bills Amount (in Rs.) 1,83,037/- MAC App. No.882/2012 Page 1 of 3 2. Future medical expenses 3. Special diet 4. Conveyance charges 5...
Renu Soni vs.state Bank of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 7507/2017 RENU SONI Versus STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner :Mr.Raghu Tandon, Advocate. Date of Decision:27. 11.2017 ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS :Mr. S.L. Gupta and Mr. Mithilesh Pal, Advocates for R-1. For the... RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.JUDGMENT1 The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks a writ or direction in the nature of Certiorari to set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 29th June, 2017, passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.163 of 2016, titled as State Bank of India vs. Mrs. Renu Soni & Ors., whilst restoring the order dated 12th February, 2016, passed by the learned DRT in S.A. No.41 of 2013, titled as Renu Soni vs. State Bank of India & Ors..2. The facts as are necessary for the adjudication of the present petition, are ...
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) – 1 vs.aditya Khanna
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:27. 11.2017 ITA542017 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) 1 ..... Appellant Through : Mr Sanjay Kumar, Advocate. versus ADITYA KHANNA CORAM:-"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) ..... Respondent Through : Mr B.N.Goswamy, Advocate.1. The Revenues grievance in this case is that its appeal is rejected by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on the ground that the tax effect is lower than the stipulated amount in terms of the prevailing Circular. The assessments involving similar questions were remitted for fresh consideration to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in the case of other parties, i.e. Mr Arvind Khanna and Mr Navin Khanna.2. The Revenue urges that the sum of Rs.33,51,269/-, in the facts and circumstances of this case, has to be added under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act (hereafter referred to as the Act). ITA5420...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »