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.
Hari Om vs.lekh Raj Singh & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
$~13 & 14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC APPEAL4642011 Decided on:3. d November, 2017 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. versus HARI OM CONST. & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Kharwar, Adv. AND + MAC APPEAL7822011 HARI OM Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Kharwar, Adv. versus LEKH RAJ SINGH & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. for R-3 Constable Hari Om, the claimant (appellant in MAC Appeal 1. No.782/2011) was on official duty with his colleague Constable Rajinder Singh, both moving on motor cycle on 17.02.2009 when their vehicle was hit by a tempo bearing registration no.HR38K7828(the MAC Appeal No.464 & 782/2011 Page 1 of 6 tempo) in the area of Police Station Kashmiri Gate, Delhi causing injuries to each of them. Two accident claim cases were instituted, including one (suit no.268/2009) on 17.07.2009 by the claimant. In each case, the drive...
Rajni Bedi vs.desh Raj Chopra and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:3. d November, 2017 C.R.P. 233/2017 RAJNI BEDI Through Mr.R.K.Sahni, Advocate ........ Petitioner versus Through None. DESH RAJ CHOPRA AND ANR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW CM No.39007/2017 (for exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. ........ RESPONDENTS 2. Application stands disposed of. C.R.P.No.233/2017 & CM No.39006/2017 (for stay) 3. This revision petition under Section 115 of the CPC impugns the order [dated 19th August, 2017 in CS No.1124/2016 of the court of Additional District Judge (Shahdara), Karkardooma Court, Delhi]. deciding a preliminary issue framed in the suit in favour of the respondent no.1/plaintiff and against the petitioner/defendant no.2.4. 5. The counsel for the petitioner/defendant no.2 has been heard. The preliminary issue which has been decided against the petitioner/defendant no.2 was as under:-"Whether the defendants prove that the suit is barred by limitation?. OPD. ...
Vivek Kochher & Anr vs.m/s Kyk Corporation Ltd & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:03. 11.2017 + W.P.(C) 2496/2012 VIVEK KOCHHER & ANR versus M/S KYK CORPORATION LTD & ANR Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr Satish Kumar and Mr Umesh Mishra, Advocates. : Mr Aayushmaan Gauba, Advocate for R-1. Mr Sanjeev Narula, CGSC with Ms Anumita Chandra, Advocate for UOI. CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioners - who claim to be carrying on the business under the name and style of M/s V.K. Automobiles and M/S KYK International respectively - have filed the present petition impugning an order dated 10.02.2012 (hereafter the impugned order) passed by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (hereafter 'IPAB'), allowing the applications filed by respondent no.1 (hereafter 'KYK Corp') for rectification of the Registration with respect to the trademark 'KYK' (hereafter 'the impugned mark').2. The ...
Ram Lal vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:3. d November, 2017 + CRL.M.C. 4467/2015 and Crl.M.A.No.15891/2015 RAM LAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Mahendra Mishra, Advocate. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI SURYA PRAKASH KHATREE ..... Respondent No.1 ..... Respondent No.2 Through: Mr.Raghuvinder Varma, APP for State with SI Naveen, P.S. Subzi Mandi, Delhi. Mr.Mukesh Kalia and Ms.Sumita Kapil, Advocates for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA I. S. MEHTA, J.JUDGMENT1 The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR No.598/2014 dated 18th November, 2014, under Sections 3of the Indian Penal Code registered at P.S. Subzi Mandi, New Delhi. CRL.M.C.4467/2015 Page 1 of 8 2. The brief facts stated are that on 18th November, 2014, the respondent no.2/complainant, who is an advocate by profession and the President of the Roshanara Club had gone to Tis Hazari Court with one Mr. Subhash Kakkar, Secretary of Roshanara Club t...
Kamlesh Kumar Gupta vs.ndmc and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
$~1 (Single Bench) * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3859/2011 KAMLESH KUMAR GUPTA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Suhail Khan, Advocate with Mr. Vishal Raj Sehijpal, Advocate and petitioner in person. versus NDMC AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sri Harsha Peechara, Standing Counsel with Mr. Mananjay Kumar Mishra, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER0311.2017 REVIEW PET. 727/2011 (by the respondents/NDMC) 1. The present review application was allowed by this Court vide order dated 16.12.2016, withdrawing the protection granted to the petitioner vide order dated 31.05.2011, of which review has been prayed for by the respondents/NDMC. Liberty was however granted to the petitioner to seek his remedies against the respondents/NDMC before the appropriate forum and an interim protection was granted to him till 08.01.2017 with a clarification that if no interim order is granted in his favour by the said date, then the respondents/NDMC would be entitl...
Anil Kumar Chauhan vs.new India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
$~R-397 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC APPEAL8562011 Decided on:03. d November, 2017 ANIL KUMAR CHAUHAN ..... Appellant Through: None versus NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Advocate for R-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that occurred on 04.08.2006 due to the negligent driving of a motor vehicle described as a bus bearing registration no.DL-1PA-6321 which was admittedly insured against third party risk with the first respondent (insurer). On his accident claim case (suit no.1196/2008), instituted on 02.12.2006, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) held inquiry and, by judgment dated 26.04.2011, returned a finding that the accident had occurred causing injuries to the appellant (claimant) on account of the negligent driving of the bus by the second respondent herein, it being a vehicle registered in the name of the third res...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.raja Ram Yadav & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
$~R-402 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC APPEAL4482014 Decided on:3. d November, 2017 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate. versus RAJA RAM YADAV & ORS. Through: Nemo. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The Appellant (insurer) was one of the party respondents before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in accident claim case (MACT No.201/11/10) instituted by the first and second respondents (collectively, the claimants) on 04.09.2010 seeking compensation on account of death of their son (Madan) in motor vehicular accident that had taken place on 16.03.2009 due to involvement of truck bearing registration No.HR-38C-3240 (the truck), it being driven at the relevant point of time by the third respondent, the fourth respondent being the registered owner at whose instance the appellant had issued the insurance cover. The claim of the first and second respondents was pressed under Section 163A of...
Savitri Sharma vs.asha Rani & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
$~5. * + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RC.REV. 4/2016 & CM No.99/2016 (for stay). SAVITRI SHARMA Through: Mr. Rajiv K. Garg, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Mohit Khanna, Adv. ASHA RANI & ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW % This Rent Control Revision Petition under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi ORDER0311.2017 Rent Control Act, 1958 impugns the order [dated 29th September, 2015 in E- 2of the Court of Additional Rent Controller-1 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi]. granting leave to the respondents to defend the petition for eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act filed by the petitioner.2. 3.4. 5. The petition was entertained and notice thereof ordered to be issued. The counsel for the respondents / tenants has been appearing. The counsels have been heard. The counsel for the petitioner / landlady has fairly stated that the only point on which notice of the petition was issued and to be urged in this petition is, whether ...
Lenin Raghuvanshi vs.state Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:3. d November, 2017 CRL.REV.P. 613/2017 & CRL.M.A. 14915/20178 & 13394/2017 LENIN RAGHUVANSHI ... Petitioner Through: Mr.Satish Tamta, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Vikram Aditya Bhaskar, Mr.Dhruv Tamta, Mr. Abhishek Vikram and Mr.Shariq Iqbal, Advocates. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ... Respondent Through: Mr.Izhar Ahmad APP for State. With SI Harpal Singh, P.S Pahar Ganj. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA I.S. MEHTA, J.JUDGMENT1 Instant revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by petitioner for setting aside the impugned order on charge dated 06.06.2017 and subsequent charge so framed vide order dated 10.07.2017 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge/SFTC-2 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in CRL.REV.P. 613/2017 Page 1 of 8 case No.51/2017 titled State vs. Lenin Raghuvanshi arising out of FIR No.226/2015 registered under SectionsIPC at police st...
Sabarkantha Annuity Pvt. Ltd. Vs.national Highways Authority of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:03. 11.2017 LPA6842017 & CM APPL. 38211/2017 SABARKANTHA ANNUITY PVT. LTD. ..... Appellant versus NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. C.M. Shroof and Ms. Neha Sangwan, Advs. For the Respondent : Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Gunjan Sinha Jain and Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advs. CORAM:-"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.1. The parties have produced the copy of the impugned judgment dated 23.10.2017 which was not available when the appeal was filed. The same is taken on record.2. The appellant impugns the judgment dated 23.10.2017 whereby the petition filed by the appellant inter alia seeking a direction to the respondent-National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), to accept the bank guarantee proposed to be furnished by the petitioner from Punjab &...
- ‹ Prev
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- Next ›
- Last »