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.
Sanjivayya Memorial Trust & Anr. Vs.anju Harit & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2017
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON:06. .11.2017 LPA4642016, CM APPL.30564/2016 SANJIVAYYA MEMORIAL TRUST & ANR. Appellant Versus ANJU HARIT & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS LPA4652016, CM APPL.30573/2016 SANJIVAYYA MEMORIAL TRUST & ANR. Appellant Versus PRAVEEN BHATNAGAR & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Appearance: Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocate for appellants in both appeals. Mr. Mukesh M. Goel with Ms. Ashi Rawat, Advocates for R-1, in both appeals. Ms. Eshita Baruah, proxy for Mr. Gaurang Kanth, Advocate for NDMC, in both appeals. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(ORAL) 1. The question which the appellant urges in these two appeals is whether the reversal of an order of 24.07.2014, by which the Delhi School Tribunal dismissed the respondent/writ petitioners appeal before it under Section 8(3) of the Delhi LPA-464 & 465/2016 Page 1 of 12 School Education Act, 1973 (the Act) by the learned single judge, i...
Anuradha Rishi vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2017
$~23 * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI TEST.CAS. 6/2015 ANURADHA RISHI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.D.R.Bhatia with Ms.Harsha, Advocates. versus STATE & ANR Through: None. ..... Respondent Date of Decision:06. h November, 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (Oral):1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, for grant of succession certificate to the estate of late Sh. Anukool Rishi.2. It is stated that the petitioner is the mother of Sh. Anukool Rishi, who expired on 19th February, 2012 at New Delhi, leaving behind the following two legal heirs: a. Anuradha Rishi (Mother) b. Smt. Aditi Rishi (Wife) 3. In the petition, it has been averred that late Sh. Anukool Rishi resided permanently in New Delhi and had his fixed place of abode at F-79/18, W-1 Lane, Sainik Farms, New Delhi-110062. It is further averred that the Sh. Anukool Rishi died intestate and that despite due and diligent sear...
Ram Phal and Ors vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2017
$~56 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:06. h November, 2017 + W.P.(C) 4198/2015 RAM PHAL AND ORS ........ Petitioners Through Mr.B.S. Mathur, Ms.Aditi & Mr. Rajat Mathur, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel with Mr. Hem Kumar, Adv. for DDA. Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. for L&B/LAC. Mr. Dev P.Bhardwaj, CGSC for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. By way of this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners seek a direction to declare the entire acquisition proceedings in respect of land of the petitioners total measuring 20 bighas 17 biswas comprised in Khasra No.(6-15), (5-12), (0-1), 6(0-7), 6(4-12), 10 (2-17), 11 (0-13), situated in revenue estate of village Karala, Delhi under the Land Acquisition Act,1894 to have lapsed in view Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fa...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs.pinki Uppal & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2017
$~R-411 to 413 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:6. h November, 2017 + MAC.APP. 1009/2011 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. versus PINKI UPPAL & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. + MAC.APP. 1012/2011 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. versus NEMPREET KAUR & ORS. Through: None. ........ RESPONDENTS + MAC.APP. 1013/2011 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. versus SIMRAN & ORS. Through: None. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) MAC Appeal No.10& conn. Page 1 of 4 1. On 23.07.2010, at about 0330 hours, a motor vehicular accident took place involving collision between two vehicles one being car bearing registration No.DL9QS1011(the car) and, the other, tractor bearing registration No.DL1 1713 (the tractor) with trolley attached. As a result of collision, four persons travelling in the car suffere...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs.brijesh Singh & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2017
$~R-414 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:6. h November, 2017 + MAC.APP. 1023/2011 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Mansi Gupta, Adv. versus BRIJESH SINGH & ANR Through: None. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The first respondent was driving a three wheeler scooter bearing No.DL1G802(TSR) on 14.08.2007 in the area of SGT Nagar, at about 7.30 p.m. when he came to be involved in a collision with Truck bearing registration No.DL1 4220 (the truck) of the appellant Municipal Corporation of Delhi, now represented by North Delhi Municipal Corporation (upon trifurcation of the municipal body), it admittedly being driven by its employee Mehtab Singh (second respondent). He (the first respondent) instituted accident claim case (111/10/07) seeking compensation under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on 29.08.2007. The tribunal issued notices in answer to which both the parties shown as respondents in the...
Baleshwar Dayal Sharma vs.bimla Gupta & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2017
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:6. h November, 2017. CM(M) 1246/2017 BALESHWAR DAYAL SHARMA Through: Mr. C.S. Bhandari, Adv. ........ Petitioner Versus Through: None. BIMLA GUPTA & ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW CM No.39567/2017 (for exemption) ........ RESPONDENTS 1.2. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. The application is disposed of. CM(M) 1246/2017 & CM No.39568/2017 (for stay) 3. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order [dated 24th August, 2017 in RCT No.30500/2016 of the Rent Control Tribunal (Headquarter), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi]. of dismissal of the appeal under Section 38 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 filed by the petitioner against the order [dated 19th September, 2016 in E No.65/2014 of the Court of Additional Rent Controller (ARC) (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi]. holding the six respondents to have made out a ground for eviction of the petitioner (from a portion of property...
Praveen Kumar Maakar vs.union of India and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:06. 11.2017 + W.P.(C) 1625/2017 PRAVEEN KUMAR MAAKAR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS : Mr Sharabh Shrivastava with Ms. Isha Mital : Ms Shiva Lakshmi, CGSC with Mr Ruchir Ranjan Rai and Ms Tarandeep Mahal. For the... Petitioner For theRespondents CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 05.03.2016 (hereinafter the impugned order) passed by respondent no.2, Registrar of Trade Marks (hereinafter the Registrar), whereby the Registrar has held that by virtue under Section 21(2) of the Trademarks Act, 1999 (hereinafter the Act) the petitioner is deemed to have abandoned his application for registration of the Trade Mark FRONTIER. The impugned order is premised on the basis that the petitioner had failed to file a Counter Statement to the Notice of Op...
M/S Civitech Builders(india) Pvt Ltd vs.raman Vihar coop.group Housing ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2017
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:1. t November, 2017 Decided on:6. h November, 2017 CS(COMM) 1478/2016 M/S CIVITECH BUILDERS(INDIA) PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff Represented by: Mr. Praveen Mahajan with Ms. versus Ruchi Mahajan, Advocates. RAMAN VIHAR COOP.GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD & ORS ..... Defendants Represented by: Mr. Apar Gupta with Ms. Garima Jain and Ms. Disha Gupta, Advocates. Mr. Anil Kumar in person/ intervenor in I.A. No.12755/2017. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA I.A. No.2878/2011 (under Order XXXVII Rule 3(v) CPC by defendants) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC against the defendant No.1, which is a Group Housing Society, defendant Nos. 2 and 3 its President and Secretary, for recovery of a sum of 2,07,90,000 (Rupees Two Crores Seven Lakhs Ninety Thousand only) with pendente lite and future interest.2. Case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff is involved in constructional activities and defendant No.1 whic...
Anita & Ors. Vs. Gurdev Verma & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2017
$~407 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:06. h November, 2017 + MAC APPEAL9762011 ANITA & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. O.P. Mannie, Advocate versus GURDEV VERMA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. R.K. Tripathi, Adv. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The accident claim case (MACP3032009) instituted on 01.12.2009 by the appellants seeking compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, on account of death of Brahm Prakash @ Pappu in a motor vehicular accident that is stated to have occurred on 30.08.2008 was dismissed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) by judgment dated 11.07.2011, inter alia, with reference to the rulings of the Supreme Court in Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Meena Variyal, 2007 (5) SCC428and Ningamma & Anr. vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd., (2009) 13 SCC710 2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the reference to Meena Variyal (supra) was improper since ...
b.s. Arora vs.andhra Bank & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2017
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10205/2016 B.S. ARORA ........ Petitioner Through Mr B.S. Arora, Mr Tausif Alam, Advocates. versus ANDHRA BANK & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr P.B. A. Srinivasan, Advocate with Ms Vidhi Gupta, Advocate for R1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER0611.2017 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 22.06.2016 passed by the Central Information Commission (hereafter CIC). He further prays that the respondent no.1 (hereafter the Bank) be directed to provide the information as sought for by him in his application dated 07.02.2014. The principal ground urged by the petitioner is that the Bank has denied information sought by the petitioner by incorrectly stating that the same was not available with the Bank. The petitioner claims that the records clearly indicate that the said information is available with the Bank and has been deliberately withheld.2. Briefly s...
- ‹ Prev
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- Next ›
- Last »