Delhi Court March 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.
Indrani Dasgupta & Anr. Vs.parvinder Kumar & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-20-2017
(ii) + versus * (i) IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: March 20, 2017 + INDRANI DASGUPTA & ANR. MAC.APP. 201/2009 Through: Mr. R.K. Kohli, Advocate .....Appellants versus PARVINDER KUMAR & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. L.K. Tyagi, Advocate for respondent No.3-Insurer MAC.APP. 318/2009 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Through: Mr. L.K. Tyagi, Advocate ..... Appellant INDRANI DASGUPTA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. R.K. Kohli, Advocate for respondents-claimants CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % (ORAL) JUDGMENT The above captioned two appeals are directed against common impugned Award of 13th December, 2008 vide which compensation of `45,78,000/- has been granted to legal heirs of one Krishnendu Dasgupta, aged 46 years, a Senior Manager in Engineers India Limited on account of his death in a road accident on 5th June, 2003. MAC. APPs.201 & 318 of 2009 Page 1 of 5 In the above-captioned first appeal, enhancement of compensation is sought by legal heirs of...
Ravinder Singh & Anr. Vs.naresh Kukreja
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-20-2017
$R-1A & R-1 (Part A) * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Decision on :20. h March, 2017 CS (COMM) 21/2016 RAVINDER SINGH & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Nemo. versus NARESH KUKREJA Through: Nemo. ..... Defendants + CS (COMM) 22/2016 RAVINDER SINGH & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Nemo. versus MANOJ KUMAR PRUTHI & ANR. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Akhil Sibal, Mr. Sanjay S. Chhabra, Mr. Vijay Laxmi & Mr. Pradeep Chhindra, Advs. for D-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER1 These two suits filed by the same set of plaintiffs, one after the other, in respect of the same subject property it being shop bearing No.6A , Khan Market, New Delhi were consolidated for purposes of trial by common order dated 11.05.2009. It may be noted that Naresh Kukreja one of the two defendants in the second suit i.e. CS (Comm) CS (Comm)21 & 22/2016 Page 1 of 4was the sole defendant in the first suit, he having been described as the owner of the subject property, the other defendant in the seco...
Padma Vathy & Anr vs.state Nct of Delhi & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2017
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:20. h December, 2016 Decided on:17. h March, 2017 CRL.M.C. 2863/2016 & Crl.M.A. 12262/2016 (stay) PADMA VATHY & ANR ........ Petitioners Represented by: Mr. Siddharth Luthra & Mr. Manoj Ohri, Sr. Advs. with Mr. Manik Dogra, Mr. Haruy Chawla, Mr. Siddharth Das, Ms. Astha Nigam, Advs. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Represented by: Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, APP for State. Mr. Sandeep Sethi & Mr. Sanjeev Puri, Sr. Advs. with Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Mr. Rushil Chandra, Mr. Dakshayani Saxena, Advs. for R2. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 Aggrieved by the order dated 9th July, 2016 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Dwarka Courts summoning the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act (in short the NI Act), the petitioners prefer the present petition seeking quashing of the said order as well as Complaint Case No.5002432/2016 titled as Religare Finvest Limited V...
Jai Bhagwan vs.anil Pabbi & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2017
$~3 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA8222016 JAI BHAGWAN Through: Mr. Shiv Charan Garg and Mr. Imran Khan, Advocates. ..... Appellant versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. ANIL PABBI & ANR. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER1703.2017 1. After addressing arguments for some time, learned counsel for the appellant seeks leave to withdraw the present appeal and states that as the appeal is still at the stage of admission, the court fee affixed on the appeal may be refunded.2. Leave, as prayed for, is granted. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.3. As the request for seeking withdrawal of the appeal is being made on behalf of the appellant after three running dates, the Registry is directed to issue a certificate in favour of the appellant for refund of only 50% of the court fees. MARCH17 2017 ap HIMA KOHLI, J...
Analog Systems and Ors vs.gnct of Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~ * % + W.P.(C) 3876/2011, CM No.8063/2011, CM No.155899/2013 and Date of judgment:17. 03.2017 CM No.18806/2014 ANALOG SYSTEMS AND ORS ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Lalit Gupta and Mr. Harsh Singhal, Advocates versus GNCT OF DELHI AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Ajjay Aroraa, Mr. Kapil Dutta and Mr. Diksha Lal, Advocates for MCD Ms. Shruthi Parasa, Advocate for Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC, GNCTD for R-4 and R-5 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) 1 The petitioner M/s. Analog Systems and Ors has preferred this writ petition through its two partners namely, Sanjeev Kumar Mehta and Rajeev Kumar Mehta. In the year 1983 they have been allotted a plot by the Government of NCT of Delhi (respondent no.1) bearing WP(C) 3876/2011 Page 1 of 9 No.S-81 measuring 300 sq. yards in the Functional Industrial Estate for Electronics (FIEE), Ohkla Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi. Entire payment in respect thereof had been...
M/S Experion Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs.m/s Ans Constructions Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CS (OS) 417/2011 Judgment delivered on:17. 03.2017 M/S EXPERION DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ..... Plaintiff versus M/S ANS CONSTRUCTIONS LTD. ..... Defendant Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Plaintiff For the Defendant : None being ex parte. : Mr Pankaj Vivek and Mr Atul Tripathi, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT M/s Experion Developers Private Limited (then known as M/s Gold 1. inter alia for Developers Private Limited) has filed the present suit recovery of 2,46,82,912/- from the defendant, M/s ANS Constructions Ltd. (hereafter ACL) in relation to a sale deed executed between them on 09.04.2008. Summons in the present suit were issued on 07.03.2011, which were 2. duly served on the defendant on 23.03.2011. Despite being served, ACL did not participate in the present proceedings and was accordingly, proceeded ex- parte by an order dated 15.09.2011. During the course of the proceedings, the plai...
Ishan Kapur vs.state & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * Reserved on:31. 01.2017 % Decided on:17. 03.2017 + TEST.CAS. 13/2013 & I.A.2608/2013 Through: Ms. Sandhya Kohli, Advocate. ........ Petitioner versus ISHAN KAPUR CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA Through: None. STATE & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT1 The present petition is filed by the petitioner through Power of Attorney namely Ms.Avani Kapur for grant of probate of the Will dated 01.09.2005 executed by his father Sh.Shiv S.Kapur in respect of his estate under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. It is submitted that his father had expired on 06.02.2010 leaving behind his wife, son and a daughter. Smt. Suvira Kapur wife of the testator also died on 24.11.2011 executing a Will dated 10.04.2008 and a codicil dated 09.09.2010, by which she had appointed her daughter namely Ms.Kavita Dina Medland as the sole executor of her Will. The petitioner was also appointed as an executor in TEST CAS.13/2013 Page 1 her Will but he expres...
Menka Lidhoo vs.sagar Taunk & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2017
* + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: March 17, 2017 MAC. APP. 403/2008 & C.M.7672/2011 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Through: Mr. L. K. Tyagi, Advocate ..... Appellant Versus MENKA LIDHOO & ORS. Through: Mr. S.M. Suri, Advocate .....Respondents MAC. APP. 407/2008 MENKA LIDHOO ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.M. Suri, Advocate Versus SAGAR TAUNK & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. L.K. Tyagi, Advocate for CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR respondent-insurer % ORAL1 JUDGMENT In the above-captioned first appeal, reduction in quantum of compensation awarded is sought by Insurer whereas in the above- captioned second appeal, its enhancement is sought by Claimant-injured. Both the appeals arise out of common impugned Award of 15th April, 2008 which grants compensation of `42,30,000/- including the interim Award with interest @ 9% per annum on account of injuries sustained by MAC.APPEALS4032008 & 407/2008 Page 1 of 9 Claimant-Menka in a road accident on 16th June, ...
Mohan Singh @ Bunty vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2017
$~R-1, 2, 3 * % + CRL.A. 755/2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:17. h March, 2017 MOHAN SINGH @ BUNTY ..... Appellant Through Mr. R.M. Tufail with Mr. Anwar A. Khan, Mr. Farooq Chaudhary, Mr. Vishal Raj Sehhijpal, Ms. Meenakshi Joshi and Ms. Astha, Advocates + + STATE CRL.A. 1480/2014 versus Through Mr. Varun Goswami, APP ..... Respondent BHAGWAN SAHAI @ CHINTU ..... Appellant Through Mr. Anup Kumar and Mrs. Neha Jaiswal, Advocates STATE versus Through Mr. Varun Goswami, APP ..... Respondent CRL.A. 762/2014 SANJAY DHANKAD @ NAKLI ..... Appellant Through Mr. R.M. Tufail with Mr. Anwar A. Khan, Mr. Farooq Chaudhary, Mr. Vishal Raj Sehhijpal, Ms. Meenakshi Joshi and Ms. Astha, Advocates STATE versus Through Mr. Varun Goswami, APP ..... Respondent Crl.A.Nos.755/2014, 1480/2014 & 762/2014 Page 1 of 24 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. All the three appeals have been heard together. Arguments have been ad...
Modi Entertainment Pvt. Ltd vs.prasar Bharati
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-2017
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: January 25, 2017 Date of decision: March 17, 2017 OMP392008 MODI ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Mallika Joshi and Mr. Amit Agarwal, Advocates. versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajeev Sharma with Ms. Radhalakshmi, Mr. Rajat Krishna and Mr. Pratishth Kaushal, Advocates. PRASAR BHARATI CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT1703.2017 Background facts 1. This petition by Modi Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (MEN) under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) challenges the majority Award dated 20th October, 2007 of the Arbitral Tribunal (AT) in the disputes between MEN and the Respondent, Prasar Bharati (PB) arising out of a Distribution Agreement (DA) dated 6th July, 2000 entered into between MEN and PB in terms of which MEN was appointed as the sole and exclusive distributor of PB for distributing two digitally encrypted satellite channels, viz.,...
- ‹ Prev
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- Next ›
- Last »