Delhi Court February 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.
Badruddin vs.state Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :15. h FEBRUARY, 2017 DECIDED ON :23. d FEBRUARY, 2017 + CRL.A.1116/2015 BADRUDDIN ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Aditya Vikram, Advocate. VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is a judgment dated 29.05.2015 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.arising out of FIR No.PS Naraina by which the appellant was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Section 6 POCSO Act and SectionsIPC. By an order dated 30.05.2015, he was sentenced to undergo RI for ten years with fine `10,000/- under Section 6 POCSO Act and RI for two years with fine `5,000/- under Section 506 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge- sheet was that on 12.01.2014 at about 09.00 p.m. at WZ-893, Naraina Crl.A.1116/2015 Page 1 of 6 Village, the appellant co...
Manish & Anr vs.monu Yadav & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision 23.02.2017 CM(M) 672/2016 and CM No.24769/2016 $~A-35 * % + MANISH & ANR ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Satya Priya Kamrah and Mr.Mukesh M. Goel, Advocates. versus MONU YADAV & ORS Through ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. In the present case, respondents No.1 and 3 have been served. None is appearing on their behalf.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as far as respondent No.2 is concerned, he is being represented by the same counsel as respondent No.1 and that presently, in any case, respondent No.2 is in judicial custody.3. The present petition is filed seeking to impugn the order dated 05.05.2016 passed by the trial court dismissing the application of the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the plaint.4. The petitioners have filed the present suit against the respondents seeking permanent injunction to restrain the respondents from interfer...
Bharadwaj Thiruvenkata Venkatavaraghavan vs.raja Arora
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2017
* % + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:23. d February, 2017 CRL.M.C. 2760/2016 & & Crl.M.A. 11755/2016 BHARDWAJ THUIRUVENKATA VENKATAVRAGHAVAN ........ Petitioner Represented by: Ms. Rebecca M. John, Sr. Adv. ASHOK ARORA versus with Ms. Parul Kumar, Mr. Shalin Arthwan, Mr. Nikhil Ahuja, Advs. ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Pearl Bindra, Adv. CRL.M.C. 4268/2016 & Crl.M.A. 17792/2016 BHARADWAJ THIRUVENKATA VENKATAVARAGHAVAN ........ Petitioner Represented by: Ms. Rebecca M. John, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Parul Kumar, Mr. Shalin Arthwan, Mr. Nikhil Ahuja, Advs. versus ASHOK ARORA ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Pearl Bindra, Adv. CRL.M.C. 4269/2016 & Crl.M.A. 17795/2016 BHARADWAJ THIRUVENKATA VENKATAVARAGHAVAN ........ Petitioner Represented by: Ms. Rebecca M. John, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Parul Kumar, Mr. Shalin Arthwan, Mr. Nikhil Ahuja, Advs. Crl.M.C. 2760/2016 & conn. matters Page 1 of 22 + + + versus ASHOK ARORA ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Pearl Bindra, A...
M/S Gulati Shoes & Anr vs.m/s Foot Print
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-2017
$~23 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA222017 & CMs 2921/2017 and 526/2017 M/S GULATI SHOES & ANR Through : Mr. Subodh Kumar, Advocate ..... Appellants versus M/S FOOT PRINT ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Gurmeet Singh Ahuja, Advocate with Mr. Rajan Kumar in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER2202.2017 CM71672017 (joint application u/O XXIII R3CPC) 1. The present joint application has been filed by the parties stating inter alia that during the pendency of the present proceedings, they have arrived at an out of court settlement, recorded in a MOU dated 21.1.2017. Though a copy of the MOU has not been enclosed with the application, counsel for the appellant hands over a copy thereof, which is taken on record.2. It is recorded in the MOU that the parties have agreed that the appellant shall pay a sum of Rs.10.00 lacs to the respondent in full and final settlement of all its claims, subject matter of the present appeal. It has been further agreed that the af...
M/S Castrol Limited & Anr vs.joginder Coolant Co Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-2017
$~3 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 1013/2016 & IA No.16727/2012 M/S CASTROL LIMITED & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr Sushant Singh and Mr Harsh Vardhan, Advocates. versus JOGINDER COOLANT CO PVT LTD Through: None. ..... Defendant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER2202.2017 VIBHU BAKHRU, J Summons in the present suit were issued on 07.12.2011. On 1. 26.03.2012, the learned counsel for the defendant had entered appearance and submitted that he would file his vakalatnama during the course of the day. At the said hearing, the learned Joint Registrar passed an order directing that the written statement be filed within the time prescribed in accordance with law and the suit was listed on 17.05.2012 for completion of pleadings and admission/denial of documents. On 17.05.2012, the learned Joint Registrar noted that the written statement had not been filed and directed that the written statement be filed in accordance with law and the suit was posted on 03.0...
Ashok K Chauhan & Ors. Vs.formosa Plastics Corporation, Usa
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-2017
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on : February 20, 2017 Judgment Delivered on : February 22, 2017 EFA(OS) 19/2016 ASHOK K CHAUHAN & ORS ..... Appellants Represented by: Mr.A.S.Chandhiok, Sr.Advocate instructed by Dr.R.M.Sharma, Mr.Tanmaya Mehta, Mr.Rajan Chawla, Mr.A.P.Singh, Mr.S.B.Singh, Mr.Gautam Chauhan and Mr.Shyam Singh, Advocates versus FORMOSA PLASTICS CORPORATION, USA ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Arvind K.Nigam, Sr.Advocate instructed by Ms.Shyel Trehan, Ms.Manjira Dasgupta and Mr.Mikhil Sharda, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The respondent : Formosa Plastics Corporation, filed EP No.38/1998 for execution of a decree of the Chancery Division of the U.K. High Court. The decree was against appellant No.1, who filed interim applications praying a summary rejection of the execution petition on the ground that the same was not maintainable. These applications were...
Smt. N. Annapurna vs.the Education Officer and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % SMT. N. ANNAPURNA W.P.(C) No.771/2011 22nd February, 2017 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Kr. Mund and Mr. Amarnath Jaiswal, Advocates. THE EDUCATION OFFICER AND ORS. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Varun Nishal, Adv. for R-1 & 3 to 5. Mr. Sethu Ramalingam, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the relief of adding of her services as a teacher with the respondent no.2-school/Dr. K.R.B.M School from 18.7.1980 to 15.7.1987 for the purpose of sanctioning of pension and pensionary benefits.... Petitioner pleads that the period from 18.7.1980 to 15.7.1987 be added to the qualifying years of service for the purposes of granting her pension and pensionary benefits. Respondent no.2/school started receiving the grant-in-aid from the respondent no.3/Director of W.P.(C)...
Satish Kumar Meena vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-2017
$~8 * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 3591/2016 Reserved on:29. h November, 2016 Date of Decision:22. d February, 2017 SATISH KUMAR MEENA Through Mr.Bhakti Vardhan Singh ........ Petitioner and versus Mr.Amit Kumar Pathak, Advocates. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Ms. Rajdipa Behura, Advocate with Ms. Garima Singh Yadav, Mr. Hilomon Kani and Ms. Kriti Handa, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR CHANDER SHEKHAR, J.The petitioner in this writ petition impugns the order dated 22nd January, 2016, whereby OA No.592/2013 filed by him has been dismissed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) holding that he was not eligible for appointment as Inspector of Posts since he had been promoted as Postmaster Grade-I.2. The Tribunal in the impugned order has referred to the decision of the Delhi High Court in W.P. (C) No.4833/2014, Union of India v. Virender Kumar Da...
Rekha Singh vs.state Election Commission and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-2017
........ Petitioner IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Through: Mr. Sudhir Naagar, Advocate with Mr. Mohit Singh, Advocate. REKHA SINGH $~34 * + W.P.(C) 1650/2017 & C.M. Nos.7428-29/2017 STATE ELECTION COMMISSION AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sumit Pushkarna with Mr. Siddhartha Nagpal, Advocates for R-1/SEC. Mr. Sanjay Ghose, ASC, with Ms. Dhanju Rana with Mr. Rhishabh Jolly, Advocate for R-2. Mr. Kavindra Gill, Advocate for R-3/UOI. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER2202.2017 1. Counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the present petition while reserving the right of the petitioner to agitate the grievance raised in the present petition, by filing a PIL before the Division Bench.2. At the request of the counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of along with pending applications with liberty granted to approach the Division Bench by filing a PIL for appropriate relief against the respondents, as per law. FEBRUARY22 2017...
Anita Singhvi vs.new Delhi Municipal Council
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-2017
$~31. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1638/2017 and CM APPL. 7316-7317/2017 ANITA SINGHVI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Joy Basu, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sumit Chander and Mr. Abishek Tripathi, Advocates. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Arjun Mitra, Advocate with Mr. Hardeep, Junior Assistant. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER2202.2017 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for quashing/setting aside the order dated 06.10.2016 passed by the respondent/NDMC under Section 72 of the NDMC Act, on the basis of a notice issued on 21.03.2002, proposing to revise the existing rateable value of the subject flat from Rs.24,354/- to Rs.5,10,000/-, with effect from 01.04.2001, on a comparable rent basis. By the impugned order, the respondent/NDMC has revised the rateable value of the subject flat from the Assessment Years 2001-02 to 2016-17.2. Mr. Mitra, learned counsel for the respondent/NDMC...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »