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.
k.k. Sharma vs.the State & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:3. d November, 2017 + CRL.M.C. 3010/2015 & CRL.M.A. 10727/2015 1. K.K. SHARMA ........ Petitioner 1. THE STATE Through: Mr. Manoj Ohri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Malhotra, Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, and Mr. Siddharth Handa and Mr. Bharat Malhotra, Advocates. versus 2. THE ADDL. COMMISSION EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZAION, MINISTRY OF LABOUR, GOVT OF INDIA ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. K. K. Ghei, APP for State with SI Harish Kumar, P. S. Naraina Mr. Keshav Mohan and Mr. Piyush Choudhary, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA I.S. MEHTA, J.JUDGMENT1 Instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner-K.K. Sharma for quashing the proceedings in FIR No.75/2010 dated 10.06.2010 registered at Police Station CRL.M.C. 3010/2015 Page 1 of 9 Naraina under SectionsIPC, and all the proceedings emanating thereof.2. Brief facts as per the complaint are that the petitioner ...
Jagdish Lohra vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 631/2014 Reserved on:26. h September, 2017 Date of decision : November 03, 2017 JAGDISH LOHRA .....Petitioner Through Mr.Madan Gera, Adv. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr.Vikas Mahajan, CGSC with Mr.S.S.Rai, Adv. with Mr.Naaveen Bhagat, DC-CISF Mr.Devik Singh with Mr.Naresh Kaushik, Advs. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA NAVIN CHAWLA, J.The petitioner in the above petition, challenges before us the Advice letter dated 31.05.2013 issued by the Deputy Secretary, Union Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred as UPSC in short), New Delhi and the order dated 25.10.2013 passed by the Director General, Central Industrial Security Force (hereinafter referred as WP(C) 631/2014 Page 1 CISF in short), Ministry of Home Affairs, reducing the pay of the petitioner by two stages for a period of three years with further direction that he will not earn increment durin...
Era Infra Engineering Ltd. Vs.steel Authority of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + OMP(I)(COMM) 436/2017 Reserved on:25th October, 2017 Date of decision:3. d November, 2017 ERA INFRA ENGINEERING LTD. ........ Petitioner Through Ms. Geeta Luthra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rahul Pandey and Mr. Prateek Yadav, Advocates. versus STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr. Kartik Rai, Ms. Veronica Mohan, Mr. Anshul Rawat, Ms. Suman Mathur and Mr. Ashish, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA IA No.12297/2017 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. OMP(I)(COMM)436/2017 & I.A.No.12296/2017 (Stay) This petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been filed by M/s Era Infra Engineering Ltd., the petitioner herein praying for the following reliefs:-"OMP(I)(COMM) 436/2017 Page 1 a. During the pendency of the present Petition, stay the operation of the Tender being floated on 26.09.2017, 28...
Pawan Kumar vs.consortium for Educational Communication
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: October 16, 2017 Judgment delivered on: November 03, 2017 + W.P.(C) 6379/2017 PAWAN KUMAR Through: Mr. Arun Khosla, Adv. with Ms. ........ Petitioner versus Khreeanka Kakkar, Adv. CONSORTIUM FOR EDUCATIONAL COMMUNICATION Through: Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Adv. and ..... Respondent Ms. Binisa Mohanty, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT V. KAMESWAR RAO, J W.P.(C) 6379/2017 1. The present petition has been filed with the following prayers:-"Wherefore in the premises, it is most respectfully prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to issue (i) a writ of certiorari quashing the Respondents Order No.CEC/Admn./80/2017/802336 dated 24.07.2017 and grant costs of the petition. (ii) Any other and further relief deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent. W.P.(C) No.6379/2017 Page 1 of 19 It is the case of the petitioner t...
Sheela & Ors. Vs.union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
$~R-398 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:3. d November, 2017 + MAC.APP. 871/2011 SHEELA & ORS. Through: None. ..... Appellants versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Ranbir Sharma was driving a three wheelor scooter bearing registration No.HR38E8022(TSR) on 13.03.2002 and at about 4.00 p.m. was crossing an unmanned railway crossing at railway Phatak No.14, Prem Nagar, near Mundka Railway Station when his TSR was hit by a railway train (Janata Express), driven by Dev Raj (RW1), Rajinder Sharma (RW2) being the guard deputed by the railways on the said train. As a result of the impact, Ranbir Sharma suffered injuries which proved to be fatal. His wife and other members of the family dependent on him, they being the appellants (collectively, the claimants), instituted accident claim case (suit No.18/06/02) on 28.05.2002 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delh...
Hari Om Sharma vs.bank of Baroda and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: November 03, 2017 W.P.(C) 9696/2017 & CM No.39491-92/2017 HARI OM SHARMA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Ashok Bhalla, Advocate versus BANK OF BARODA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Arun Aggarwal, Advocate for R-1 to R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) 1. In a departmental enquiry, petitioner had been inflicted with punishment of compulsory retirement by the Disciplinary Authority vide order of 3.5.2017 (Annexure P-20) which was challenged by the petitioner by way of an appeal (Annexure P-21).2. The grievance of petitioner herein is that without being heard in appeal, the show cause notice on 28.09.2017 (Annexure P-22) has been received by him for enhancement of penalty from compulsory retirement to dismissal from service. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioners appeal stands impliedly dismissed without there being any finding and without petitioner being heard. It is pointed out by p...
Ansal Housing & Construction Limited vs.deputy Commissioner of Income ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
$~23 & 26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:03. 11.2017 ITA9312017 ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LIMITED versus .... Appellant ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .... Respondent % + + ITA9342017 ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LIMITED versus .... Appellant DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Mr Gaurv Jain, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr Ashok Manchanda and Mr Raghvendra Singh, Advocates. CORAM:-"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) C.M. 39547/2017 (exemption) in ITA9312017 C.M. 39549/2017 (exemption) in ITA9342017 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. ITA9312017 & 934/2017 Page 1 of 14 ITA9312017 & ITA9342017 1. The present appeals by the assessee, under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), arise out of the common order dated 28.03.2017 pa...
Ranjeet Kumar @ Jeetu vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 1036/2017 Order reserved on 1st November, 2017 Order pronounced on 03rd November, 2017 RANJEET KUMAR @ JEETU Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. Versus STATE ..Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with SI. Subhash Chand, P.S. R.K. Puram.1. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL By way of the present petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred Cr.PC.), the petitioner seeks grant of Regular Bail in FIR No.443/2016 under Sections 363/341/354 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as IPC) & 8 of the POCSO Act registered at Police Station R. K. Puram.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.10.2016, Nagma complainant approached the police station, R.K. Puram and stated that she lives in R.K. Puram with her family and cousin sister. That at about 1 pm her cousin sister went to public toilet. That a girl named XXX came to her house ...
Sanjay Oberoi vs.manoj Bageriya & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
$~R-391 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC APPEAL8292011 Decided on:3. d November, 2017 SANJAY OBEROI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Jatinder Kamra, Advocate versus MANOJ BAGERIYA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant was the claimant before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) in an accident claim case (suit no.217/2009) instituted on 02.06.2009 and decided by judgment dated 19.04.2011 which also governs another similar claim case arising out of the same accident. The tribunal held that the claimant had suffered injuries due to the negligent driving of Maxi-Cab bearing Registration no.MP-13-TA-0207, holding the driver and owner of the said vehicle jointly and severally liable. The third respondent (insurer) was held liable to indemnify and pay the compensation which was determined in the total sum of Rs.3,11,700/-, it having been calculated thus :-"Medicines and m...
Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.mahesh Kumar & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2017
$~R-395 & 396 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:3. d November, 2017 + MAC.APP. 843/2011 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv. versus MAHESH KUMAR & ORS Through: None. + MAC.APP. 255//2012 MAHESH KUMAR & ORS Through: None. versus ........ RESPONDENTS ..... Appellants ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Mahesh Kumar, the claimant, now appellant in MAC Appeal 255/2012, then aged 27 years, employed as an executive in Human Resource Department of Amar Ujala Publications, suffered injuries in motor vehicular accident that occurred on 18.03.2008 upon being hit by Honda City Car bearing registration No.DL7F4391 driven MAC Appeal No.843/2011 &conn. Page 1 of 6 negligently by respondents Suleman Khan (the driver), it being registered in the name of Reliance Retail Ltd. (registered owner) and admittedly insured agains...
- ‹ Prev
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- Next ›
- Last »