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.
Ranjeet vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2017
$~18 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO1812010 RANJEET UNION OF INDIA Date of Decision:24. h November, 2017 . Appellant Through: Mr. Rohit Aggarwal, Advocate versus . Respondent Through: Mr.Joydeep Mazumdar, Lead Counsel Northern Railway with Mr.Rohit Dutta, Mr.Kamlesh Kumar, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 16th December, 2009 whereby the appellants application for compensation has been dismissed.2. On 4th July, 2008, the appellant fell down from Gorakh Dham Express bearing train No.2556 on platform no.2 of Kishan Ganj Railway Station, and he suffered grievous injuries which resulted in amputation of right leg below knee level. The appellant was aged about 12 years at the time of the accident.3. The Railways did not dispute that the appellant fell down from Gorakh Dham Express on 4th July, 2008 but the claim was contested on the ground that the appellant was negligent as he was travelling ...
Bimla Uniyal & Anr. Vs. Hardeep Singh & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2017
$~R-565 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC APPEAL8462012 Decided on:24. h November, 2017 BIMLA UNIYAL & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Sudhanshu Tomar, Advocate versus HARDEEP SINGH & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate for R-3/insurance company CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Chirag Uniyal, 24 years old, suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that occurred on 22.02.2009 due to negligent driving of a motor vehicle described as one car bearing registration no.DL- 3CBE-1737, admittedly insured against third party risk with the third respondent (insurer) for the period in question, and died in the consequence. His parents (claimants) instituted accident claim case (suit no.80/10) on 04.02.2010 which was decided by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal), by judgment dated 13.02.2012, whereby compensation in the total sum of Rs.5,88,169/- was awarded with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a, the direction to pay ...
Kaushaliya Bhambhani vs.state and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order reserved on 20th November, 2017 Order pronounced on 24th November, 2017 + CRL.REV.P. 631/2015 KAUSHALIYA BHAMBHANI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Vishwendra Verma and Ms. Shivali, versus Advocates. STATE & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State. Mr. Manish Makkar, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL Crl. M. A. No.16954/2017 (Condonation of Delay) This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 482 Cr.PC seeking condonation of 174 delay in filing the application. Heard. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing the application is condoned. Application stands disposed of. Crl. M. A. No.16953/2017 (Restoration) The present application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.PC for restoration of the Criminal Revision Petition No.631/2015 which was dismissed in default on 18.04.2017. CRL.REV.P. 631/2015 Page 1 ...
Santosh Kumari Dalal vs.reliance General Insurance Co Ltd & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2017
$~ 29 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:24. h November, 2017 + MAC.APPEAL6322011 SANTOSH KUMARI DALAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate. versus RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD & ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA Through: Mr. Rajeev M. Roy, Advocate ..Respondents for R-1. JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant was the claimant before the Tribunal in accident claim case (MACP No.471A/2010), instituted on 19.08.2008, whereby she sought compensation under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for injuries suffered by her in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 06.02.2008, due to negligent driving of Tata Indigo Car bearing registration No.DL-3C-AC-6630, admittedly insured against third party risk with the first respondent (the insurer) for the period in question. By judgment dated 11.03.2011, the Tribunal upheld the said claim and awarded compensation in the total sum of Rs.1,75,741/-, fastening the liability on the insurer to pay with int...
Ras Bihari Singh vs.state ( Nct of Delhi )
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2017
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order reserved on 16th November, 2017 Order pronounced on 24th November, 2017 CRL.REV. P. 805/2016 RAS BIHARI SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Pranesh, Advocate. versus STATE ( NCT OF DELHI ) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with SI Deepak, PS-Nariana. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL1 The present Criminal Revision Petition has been filed under Section 397 read with Section 482 Cr.PC assailing the order dated 22.11.2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-03, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in Criminal Appeal No.8706/2016 titled as Ras Bihari Singh Vs. State whereby the conviction order dated 25.05.2016 and order on sentence dated 30.06.2016 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate-3, Patiala House Court, New Delhi, was upheld.2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that on 27.09.2010, the accused was driving a vehicle i.e. Innova Car bearing registration No.DL-4-CAE-4071 in a rash...
Gold Peak Industries (Holdings) Limited vs.mr. Bharat Dhawan and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2017
6 $~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 391/2017 & I.A. 6724/2017 GOLD PEAK INDUSTRIES (HOLDINGS) LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Shrawan Chopra, Advocate with versus Mr. Pundreek Dwivedi, Advocate. MR. BHARAT DHAWAN AND ANR Through: Mr. Puneet Kaushik, Advocate for defendant No.1. .....Defendants Date of Decision:24. h November, 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) JUDGMENT1 At the outset, learned counsel for defendant No.1 states that his client has never dealt with GP Batteries at any given point of time. He also states that defendant No.1 does not intend to deal with GP Batteries even in future.2. The statement made by learned counsel for defendant No.1 is accepted by this Court and defendant No.1 is held bound by the same.3. In view of the aforesaid statement, learned counsel for plaintiff does not wish to proceed any further against defendant No.1. Consequently, defendant No.1 is deleted from the array of parties. CS(COMM) 391/2017...
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.suresh Kumar & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2017
$~R-562 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC APPEAL8122012 Decided on:24. h November, 2017 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate versus SURESH KUMAR & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant (insurer) is aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 24.04.2012 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) on accident claim case (M-85C/11) of the first respondent fastening the liability to pay compensation in the sum of Rs.4,82,162/- against it. The challenge in the appeal is to the procedure adopted by the tribunal, it having gone ahead to grant such award in absence of any evidence.2. The appeal was put in the list of Regulars as per order dated 22.01.2016. On it being called out in its turn, there is no appearance on behalf of the first respondent (claimant). It is noted that the claimant had also not been appearing for three consecutive dates before the...
Mohd. Shariqui Khaan vs.state and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2017
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:24. h November, 2017 + W.P.(CRL) 941/2017 and Crl.M.A. No.5235/2017 MOHD. SHARIQUI KHAAN ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajeev Saxena and Mr. Rachit Shaney, Advocates. versus STATE AND ANR ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Sanjay Lao, ASC for the State with Insp. Rajnish Kumar, PS Jamia Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner was issued a notice under Section 50 of the Delhi Police Act requiring him to show cause as to why order of externment be not passed against him under Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act inter-alia based on the involvement of the petitioner in the 7 FIRs as under: S.No.FIR No.Under Section Police Station P. Position 1.2. 3.4.5. 6452/342/365/3IPC Jamia Nagar Quashed 392/3IPC Jamia Nagar PT16913 451/323/34/ IPC NFC PT59914 341/323/506/4IPC Jamia Nagar PT63415 186/3IPC NFC PI W.P.(CRL) 941/2017 Page 1 of 11 6.7. 8341/143/...
Cpl Uttam Dubey vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2017
$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10430/2017 & C.M. No.42624/2017 CPL UTTAM DUBEY ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Virender Singh Kadian, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Through: Mr. Akshay Makhija with Mr. Aditya Goyal and Mr. Seerat Singh, Advocates. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL % ORDER2411.2017 1. The petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of mandamus to the respondent No.2/Chief of Air Staff, Air HQ (Vayu Bhavan), directing him to dispose of his Redressal of Grievance application dated 05.6.2017 and an application dated 19.6.2017 [Annexure P-1 (colly)]..2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that while the aforesaid applications submitted by the petitioner were still pending disposal by the respondent No.2, in the meantime, the respondent No.4 awarded a punishment of severe reprimand to the petitioner, on 23.8.2017.3. Pertinently, the order dated 23.8.2017 is not record. Further, the sai...
Shanti Swaroop vs.lalindra Kumar Mishra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2017
$~R-557 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:24. h November, 2017 + MAC. APPEAL No.799/2012 & CM No.12703/2012 SHANTI SWAROOP ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Advocate versus Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate ..Respondent LALINDRA KUMAR MISHRA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. By judgment dated 25.04.2012, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, decided the accident claim case (MACT No.06/11), instituted on 17.08.2004, by the respondent. By the said judgment, the appellant was held liable to pay compensation to the respondent on account of injuries statedly suffered by the respondent (claimant) in a motor vehicular accident that occurred on 22.02.2003.2. It had been alleged by the claimant in the case before the Tribunal that he had been hit by a car bearing registration No.UP-15- LJ-4166. He described the appellant as the driver-cum-owner of the car, which is disputed by him (the appellant). Concededly, the claimant had not mentioned the...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »