Delhi Court December 2017 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2017 Page 59 of about 598 results (0.011 seconds)Raj Rani vs.suresh Kumar Gujar & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-620 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:01. t December, 2017 + MAC APPEAL10912012 RAJ RANI Through: Nemo. Versus ... Appellant SURESH KUMAR GUJAR & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant was the claimant before the motor accident claims tribunal in accident claim case (MACT No.633/2008) instituted by her on 28.07.2008, which after inquiry was decided by the tribunal, by judgment dated 30.04.2008, holding that she had suffered injuries in the motor vehicular accident that had occurred on 28.03.2008 due to negligent driving of motor vehicle described as bus, bearing registration No.RJ-14-PA-1733, admittedly insured against third party risk for the period in question with the third respondent (insurer). It was proved before the tribunal that the injuries suffered were in the nature of amputation of second and third toe of the left foot. The disability certificate (page 157 of ...
Tag this Judgment!Venu Madhava K & Anr. Vs.the State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) INDIAN POTASH LTD. Through: Through:1. 2. Mr. Manoj Taneja, Advocate. ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Izhar Ahmad, APP for State. Mr. Tanveer Ahmed Mir, Advocate for R-2. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:01. h December, 2017 CRL.M.C. 2463/2013 & CRL.M.A. Nos. 9529/2013, 14694/2015 1.2. M/s FOUR SEASONS ENERGY VENTURES PVT. LTD. VENU MADHAVA K ........ Petitioners CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA JUDGMENT I. S. MEHTA, J.1. By way of the instant petition under Section 482 read with Section 483 Cr.P.C. the petitioners are seeking for setting aside and quashing of the impugned order dated 16.05.2013 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (Central-02), Tis Hazari Crl.M.C. 2463/2013 Page 1 of 22 Courts, Delhi in CC. No.648/RN/2010 wherein the application filed by the petitioners under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was dismissed.2. The brief facts as stated in the complaint filed by the respondent No.2-M/s Indian Potash Ltd. under Sec...
Tag this Judgment!Dig Bahadur @ Rahul @ Vinod vs.state
Court: Delhi
$~R-32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision: December 01, 2017 CRL.A. 333/2011 DIG BAHADUR @ RAHUL @ VINOD ..... Appellant Through: Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate (DHCLSC) Versus STATE Through: Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP ..... Respondent for the State with SI Om Prakash, PS Parliament Street PRATIBHA RANI, J.(Oral) 1. The appellant has preferred this appeal assailing the judgment dated 8th February, 2011 and order on sentence dated 14th February, 2011 passed in Session Case No.44/2008 (in FIR No.822/2007 under Sections 342/381/397/395/4IPC, PS Prashant Vihar) whereby he has been convicted for committing the offence punishable under Section 392 read with Section 397 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine of 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for five months.2. Ms.Saahila Lamba, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that this appeal is being pressed to the extent of challenging his conviction under Section 397 IPC as ...
Tag this Judgment!The United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.prabha Devi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-613-614 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:01. t December, 2017 + MAC APPEAL10732012 and CM206402013 THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Through: Mr. D.D. Singh and Mr. ... Appellant versus Navdeep Singh, Advocates PRABHA DEVI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None + MAC APPEAL10822012 and CM172402012 THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Through: Mr. D.D. Singh and Mr. ... Appellant versus Navdeep Singh, Advocates SAMILA KHATOON & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. By these appeals, the insurance company on which the liability to pay the compensation has been fastened questions the common judgment dated 06.07.2012 rendered on the respective claims of the MACA Nos.1073/2012 & 1082/2012 Page 1 of 3 first and second respondent in each case, on account of deaths of their bachelor sons Charan Singh Rawat and Javed in a motor vehicular accident that had occurred on 27.01.2011 due to the negligent dri...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Seema Katyal vs.union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: December 01, 2017 + W.P.(C) 10648/2017 1. SMT. SEEMA KATYAL ........ Petitioner Through: Dr.L.S.Chaudhary, Mr.Ajay Chaudhary, Ms.Rakhi Tomar, Mr.Anurag Singh Tomar, Mr.Vishesh Kumar, Mr.Parambeer Singh and Mr.Viresh Chaudhary, Advocates Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL)... Petitioners appeal of 21st February, 2006 (Annexure P-11) is said to be pending before the Chairman of second respondent. It is petitioners case that despite reminders (Annexures P-12 to P-14), the fate of petitioners appeal is not known. It is pointed out that as per RTI information (Annexure P-16) received on 22nd December, 2010, no record/file of petitioner is available and petitioner had preferred an appeal under RTI Act on 30th October, 2013 which was responded to vide order of 9th December, 2013 (Annexure P-24) wherein it was disclosed that...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Company Limited vs.arun Kumar Goel & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-624 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:1. T December, 2017 + MAC. APPEAL No.1111/2012 and CM No.17890/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Panakj Seth, Advocate versus ARUN KUMAR GOEL & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA Through: Nemo. ..Respondents JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The inclusion of Rs.25,000/- towards lawyers fee and Rs.5,000/- towards out of pocket expenses added as liability of the insurer (appellant) by the tribunal, by judgment dated 03.07.2012, is only pressed as the contention in the appeal at hand challenging the judgment to that extent rendered in accident claim case (MACT No.317/10/08) of the first respondent/claimant.2. There being no justification for such inclusion, the directions of payment of lawyers fee and out of pocket expenses are set aside.3. The award is modified accordingly.4. By order dated 15.10.2012, the insurance company had been directed to deposit 50% of the awarded amount, excluding counsel fee a...
Tag this Judgment!Rajvir Singh & Anr. Vs.raghuveer Singh & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-615 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:01. t December, 2017 + MAC APPEAL10792012 and CM171442012 RAJVIR SINGH & ANR. ... Appellant Through: Mr. Jatinder Kamra, Advocate versus RAGHUVEER SINGH & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Suman Bagga and Ms. Anjali Chawla, Advocates for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The accident claim case (suit no.703/2010), was instituted on 03.10.2007, by the appellants (claimants) seeking compensation under Sections 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, on account of death of their bachelor son, Amit Kumar, in a motor vehicular accident that occurred on 15.09.2007, in the area of Sadiq Nagar in Delhi, involving collision between the two vehicles; one being Maruti car bearing registration no.DL-3CF-8654 (car) and, the other, truck bearing registration no.RJ-32G-1927 (truck). As a result of the said collision, Sarabjeet Singh @ Monu, driver of the car also died. The deceased Amit Kumar, on account ...
Tag this Judgment!Moin Akhtar Qureshi vs.uoi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:13. 11.2017 Judgment delivered on:01. 12.2017 $~ * % + W.P.(CRL) 2465/2017 MOIN AKHTAR QURESHI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K. Handoo, Mr. Yoginder Handoo, Mr. Aditya Chaudhary, Mr.Manish Shukla and Mr. Nishant Kumar, Adv. versus UOI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Anil Soni and Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC for UOI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI VIPIN SANGHI, J.JUDGMENT1 The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner Moin Akhtar Qureshi through his daughter to seek a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondent Enforcement Directorate (ED) to produce him before the Court and to set aside his illegal arrest vide the arrest memo dated 25.08.2017. He also seeks the quashing of the application dated 16.08.2017 moved by the respondent ED to seek his ED custody remand, and the order W.P.(CRL) 2465/2017 Page 1 of 71 dated 26.08.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge,...
Tag this Judgment!Virender Kumar Jha vs.state (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
$~R-20 (Persons in Custody) * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision: December 01, 2017 CRL.A. 383/2011 VIRENDER KUMAR JHA ..... Appellant Through: Mr.M.L.Yadav, Advocate. (DHCLSC) versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for the State. PRATIBHA RANI, J.(Oral) 1. The appellant/convict has preferred this appeal impugning the judgment dated 23rd April, 2010 and order on sentence dated 28th April, 2010 passed in Sessions Case No.256/2008 (in FIR no.57/2007 under SectionIPC, PS Swaroop Nagar) whereby he has been convicted for committing the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(f) and 506 IPC and sentenced as under:-"(i) Under Section 376(2)(f) IPC : (ii) Under Section 506 IPC : CRL.A. No.383/2011 fine to undergo RI for ten of years with `20,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for one year. to undergo RI for one year with dine of `2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI three months. Pa...
Tag this Judgment!Anjana Gaba vs.director of Education Delhi & Ors
Court: Delhi
* + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: December 01, 2017 W.P.(C) 174/2016 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Naveen Pushkarna, Advocate ANJANA GABA versus DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION DELHI & ORS Through: Mr.Rahul Bakshi, Advocate and ........ RESPONDENTS Mr.Laxmi Narayan from Education Department for R-1 Mr.Nikhil Parikshit, Advocate for R-2 and R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) This is petitioners second round of litigation. In the first round, respondent-school was directed to release the admitted amount of `83,030/- to petitioner within two weeks and the said amount was to be accepted by the petitioner without prejudice to her rights and contentions. In pursuance of order of 26th September, 2017 in the first round of litigation, petitioner has admittedly received the aforesaid amount of `83,030/- but without interest. The question of interest was left open in the first round of litigation, to be considered by respondent-Directorate of Educati...
Tag this Judgment!