Delhi Court December 2017 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2017 Page 14 of about 598 results (0.019 seconds)Harish Chander vs.union of India Through: Lac (Shahdara) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(C) 5462/2016 Date of decision:19. h December, 2017 HARISH CHANDER ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Deepak Khosla, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA THROUGH: LAC (SHAHDARA) & ANR. Through: Mr. Akhil Mittal and Ms. Rachna ........ RESPONDENTS Maheshwari, Advs. for L&B/LAC. Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel with Mr. Hem Kumar and Ms. Simmee Kumari, Advs. for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. With the consent of the parties, present petition is set down for final hearing and disposal.2. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land of the petitioner comprised in Khasra nos. 61(2-15) and 614 (2-8) situated in the revenue estate of Village-Gokalpur, Ilaqa Shahdara, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as subject land), are deemed to have lapsed in view ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Dev Sharma & Anr. Vs.rakesh Kumar Srivastav & Ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.1038/2017 Reserved on:13. h December, 2017 Pronounced on:19. h December, 2017 + % RAM DEV SHARMA & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. P.N. Bhardwaj, Advocate with Mr. Ashutosh Bhardwaj, Advocate. versus RAKESH KUMAR SRIVASTAV & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J C.M. Appl. No.45190/2017 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. RFA No.1038/2017 and C.M. Appl. No.45189/2017 (for stay) 1. This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) by the appellants/defendant nos. 2 and 3 in the suit, impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 16.8.2017 by which the trial court has decreed the suit of the RFA No.1038/2017 Page 1 of 15 respondent nos. 1 and 2/plaintiffs by granting various reliefs of injunctions. The operative relief para of the impugned judgment...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh Sahni vs.lal Babu Rai & Anr
Court: Delhi
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :19. h DECEMBER, 2017 FAO3742015, CM254032015 & 6031/2016 ..... Appellant RAJESH SAHNI Through : Mr.Yajur Bhalla, Advocate. versus LAL BABU RAI & ANR Through : Mr.R.K.Nain, Advocate for R1. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(Oral) 1. Present appeal has been preferred by the appellant Rajesh Sahni under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter the Act) to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated 13.10.2014 of learned Commissioner whereby compensation of `4,45,289/- was awarded to the respondents.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Undisputedly, on 12.07.2009 the victim Mantoo Kumar sustained burn injuries due to electrocution; he succumbed to the injuries on 15.07.2009. A case vide FIR No.167/2009 under Section 304A IPC was registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar.3. The respondents filed claim petition under Se...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Kumar vs.state
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :16. h DECEMBER, 2017 DECIDED ON :19. h DECEMBER, 2017 + CRL.A.1686/2014 ASHOK KUMAR ..... Appellant STATE Through : Mr.Azhar Qayam with Mr.Narender Kr., Advocates. versus ..... Respondent Through : Aashaa Tiwari, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR S.P GARG, J.1. Aggrieved by a judgment dated 28.07.2014 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case no.54/2012 arising out of FIR No.115/2012 registered at Police Station Nand Nagri whereby the appellant Ashok Kumar was held guilty for committing offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, the present appeal has been preferred by him. By an order dated 30.07.2014, the appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine `1,000/-. Crl.A.1686/2014 Page 1 of 8 2. Briefly stated the prosecution case as set up in the charge-sheet was that on 29.03.2012 at about 9.00 p.m. in front of House No.E-60/359, Jhuggi, Sunder Nagri, Delhi...
Tag this Judgment!Harkirat Singh vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(C) 201/2016 Date of decision:19. h December, 2017 HARKIRAT SINGH Through: Ms. Richa Oberoi, Mr. Prateek Kohli ........ Petitioner and Mr. Ankit Banati, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Bhagwan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr. Kamaldeep, Adv. for R1. Ms. Aastha Tyagi, Adv. for L&B/LAC. Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel with Mr. Hem Kumar and Ms. Simmee Kumari, Advs. for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. With the consent of the parties, present petition is set down for final hearing and disposal. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land of the petitioner being half portion (vertically bisecting the plot from front) comprised in Khasra No.180(3-16) and 1806 (4-16) measuring 4 Bighas and 6 Biswas si...
Tag this Judgment!Mira Vachani & Ors vs.shanta Wadhwani & Ors
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 3014/2011 & IA No.6749/2017 (u/O XX R-18 r/w O-XII R-6 CPC) MIRA VACHANI & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. S. Santanam Swaminadhan and Ms. Nishtha Khurana, Advs. Versus SHANTA WADHWANI & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Manish Sangwan, Adv. for D-2. Ms. Renuka Singh and Ms. Shreya Dusey, Advs. for D-3&4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW ORDER1912.2017 1. In this suit for partition of the estate comprising of moveable and immoveable properties of late Sh. Laxmi D. Hingorani, no issues even have been framed till date, though the suit is pending for the last six years.2. The counsel for the plaintiffs, the counsel for the defendant No.2 Nisha Wadhwani and the counsel for the defendants No.3&4 Malika Wadhwani and Shonali Wadhwani today also seek adjournment to settle the matter.3. 4.5. Suits cannot be kept pending in this fashion. None appears for defendants No.1 & 5 to 7. The counsel for the defendant No.2 states that the de...
Tag this Judgment!Piccadily Hotel Pvt. Ltd. Vs.orange International Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.1048/2017 + % PICCADILY HOTEL PVT. LTD. ORANGE INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA versus Through: None 18th December, 2017 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocates ..... Respondent To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No.45998/2017 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. RFA No.1048/2017 & CM No.45997/2017 (stay) 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant in the suit impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 17.08.2017 by which the trial court has decreed the suit for recovery filed by the respondent/plaintiff for an amount of Rs.15,23,488/- along with interest RFA No.1048/2017 Page 1 of 7 at 10% per annum. Suit has been decreed for recovery on account of goods/marble slabs received by the appellant/defendant from the respondent/plaintiff.2. The fa...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Rakesh Kumar Juneja & Ors vs.state of Delhi & Anr
Court: Delhi
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:18. h December, 2017 TEST.CAS. 73/2017 & IA No.15161/2017 (for stay). SHRI RAKESH KUMAR JUNEJA & ORS Through: Mr. R.M. Bagai, Adv. ........ Petitioners versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. STATE OF DELHI & ANR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW IA No.15162/2017 (for exemption).1. 2. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. TEST.CAS. 73/2017 & IA No.15161/2017 (for stay).3. This Petition under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 seeks revocation of the probate ordered to be granted of the document dated 7th June, 2003 as validly executed last Will of Baba Chakravarthy Darvesh.4. The case of the petitioners is (i) that DLF Housing and Construction Limited, being the developers of the colony of Greater Kailash, Part-II, New Delhi, vide Sale Deed dated 27th July, 1964 sold plot of land bearing no.E- 255, Greater Kailash, Part-II, therein to one Gurdial Kaur; (ii) that ...
Tag this Judgment!Ranbir Singh vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~56 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(C) 4973/2017 Date of Judgment:18. h December, 2017 ........ Petitioner RANBIR SINGH Through: Mr.M.K.Upadhyay, Adv. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Yeeshu Jain and Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advts. for L&B/LAC. Ms.Shobhna Takiar and Mr.Udayan Khandelwal, Advts. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceedings in respect of the land bearing Khasra No.(4-16), 17 (4-14) and 24 (4-16) total area measuring 14 bighas 6 biswas, having 1/3rd share, i.e. 2 bigha 5 biswas, situated in the revenue estate of village Pooth Kalan, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the subject land) are deemed to have lapsed in view of the fact that neither possession of the land has been taken nor compensation has been paid.2. The necessary facts to be no...
Tag this Judgment!d.k. Gupta & Anr. Vs.renu Munjal
Court: Delhi
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. h December, 2017 Pronounced on:18. h December, 2017 + O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 106/2017 & IA No.14824/2017 D.K. GUPTA & ANR. RENU MUNJAL ........ Petitioners Through : Mr.Shashank Garg, Advs. and Ms.Aakansha Kaul, Advs. for P-1 Mr.Ashish Virmani, Adv. for P-2 versus ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Sanjeev Narula and Mr.Ajay Sondhi, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This petition is filed seeking termination of mandate of the learned arbitrator, on the plea the respondent is ineligible to act as an arbitrator, in terms of Schedule VII of the amended Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and as a sequitur, is also ineligible to even appoint/nominate an arbitrator in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in TRF Ltd. v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd., (2017) 8 SCC377 It is urged since the ineligibility of the purported arbitrator is a de jure ineligibility which goes to the root of the appointme...
Tag this Judgment!