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.
Union of India & Ors vs.n.d. Azad & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2017
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 5873/2016 Date of decision:2. d March, 2017 UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Government Standing Counsel. Rakesh Kumar, Central versus N.D. AZAD & ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Mishra and Mr. Saurabh, Advocates for R-1 to 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) The Union of India and its functionaries have impugned order dated 21st August, 2015, passed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) in OA No.3326/2013.2. The Tribunal in the impugned order has held as under:-"from joining and Indore Commissionerate 3. In their reply, the respondents have opposed the averments made by the applicants even though factual position regarding dates of transfer of applicants to Patna Commissionerate as mentioned in the O.A. have not been disputed. According to the respondents, as per ICT Circular F.No.A-22...
Mukul Bhatia vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2017
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :2. d MARCH, 2017 MUKUL BHATIA CRL.M.C. 3830/2016 ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.Parth Goswami, Advocate. STATE versus Through : Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP with SI Sandeep Kumar, PS Rani Bagh. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG + S.P.GARG, J.(Oral) 1. Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated 30.09.2016 in case FIR No.9registered under Sections 4IPC at PS Rani Bagh whereby the permission to travel USA was declined. Status report / Additional Status report are on record.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. It is informed that after the registration of the FIR the petitioner has travelled abroad and has returned. The present petition for permission to travel abroad after getting bail has been filed.3. Learned APP states that the documents filed by the petitioner has since been verified and fou...
Sh. Zile Singh vs.food Corporation of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % SH. ZILE SINGH W.P. (C) No.3432/2007 2nd March, 2017 Through: ........ Petitioner Mr. Mimansak Bhardwaj, Advocate. Versus FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Deepak Dewan, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner impugns the orders of the departmental authorities, of the disciplinary authority dated 27.6.2005 and the appellate authority dated 2.11.2006 and by which orders the petitioner has been imposed the punishment of dismissal from services along with the forfeiture of gratuity.2. The facts of the case are that against the petitioner a charge-sheet was issued on 16.11.2002 alleging that petitioner has caused loss to the respondent no.1/Food Corporation of India (FCI)/ employer on account of accepting Below Rejection Level (BRL) rice W.P.(C) No....
smt.leela Devi & Anr. Vs.sumit Batra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:02. 03.2017 C.R.P. 152/2014 & CM No.16977/2014 SMT.LEELA DEVI & ANR. Through Mr.Abdul Sattar, Adv. ........ Petitioners $~A-9 * % + versus SUMIT BATRA Through Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Adv. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) The present Revision Petition is filed under section 115 CPC1 seeking to impugn the decree/order dated 25.8.2014 passed by the trial court under section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for possession under section 6 of the Specific Relief Act regarding property No.C-63, DDA Flats, Kalkaji, Delhi and other connected reliefs. It was contended in the plaint by the respondent that on 21.2.2012 he entered into a lease for a period of five years w.e.f. 1.3.2012 to 28.2.2017 from the owner of the suit property Shri Kuldeep Sharma vide registered lease agreement dated 21.2.2012 (Ex.PW1/2) duly registered with the office of Sub Registrar. It ...
Dilip Kumar vs.sunita Mittal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2017
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:2. d March, 2017 CRL.M.C. 4230/2014 DILIP KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. R.S. Chauhan, Advocate with Mr. Varun Nischal, Advocate. versus SUNITA MITTAL Through: Mr. Anand Prakash, Advocate. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA JUDGMENT I.S. MEHTA, J.1. The instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is preferred by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 23.08.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Cum Special Judge-II, CBI Rohini Courts: Delhi in criminal revision No.wherein the learned ASJ disposed of the petition directing against the order dated 24.05.2014 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate in complaint case No.Crl.M.C. No.4230/2014 Page 1 of 13 1555/1/12 titled as Ms. Sunita Mittal vs. Dilip Kumar @ Raju & Ors.2. The brief facts stated are that Ms. Sunita Mittal present respondent/complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1...
Vijay Pal & Ors. Vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2017
* + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on : March 02nd, 2017 CRL.A. No.736/2000 RAJU SINGH & ANR. ..... Appellants Through Mr.K.S. Singh, Adv. with Ms.Tripta, Adv. & Mr.Rahul, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, APP for the State with SI Kamal Kumar WITH CRL.A. No.742/2000 RAJ BAHADUR & ORS. Through Mr.K.S. Singh, Adv. with Ms.Tripta, Adv. & Mr.Rahul, Adv. ..... Appellants versus STATE Through Mr.Ashish Dutta, APP for the State with SI Kamal Kumar. ..... Respondent AND CRL.A. No.743/2000 & Crl.M.A. No.12786/2013 VIJAY PAL & ORS. ..... Appellants Through Mr.K.S. Singh, Adv. with Ms.Tripta, Adv. & Mr.Rahul, Adv. versus STATE Crl. A. Nos.736, 742 & 743 of 2000 ..... Respondent Page 1 of 13 Through Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, APP for the State with SI Kamal Kumar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.JUDGMENT1 The present appeals have been preferred against a common judgment of conviction dated 17.11.2000 and common order on senten...
Mata Prasad vs.new Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2017
$~29 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:2. d March, 2017 + W.P. (C) 11562/2016 & C.M. No.45572/2016 MATA PRASAD Through Mr.N.K. Sahoo, Adv. versus ........ Petitioner NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr.Sri Harsha Peechara, ASC, NDMC with Mr.Mananjay K. Mishra & Ms.Vidhi Jain, Advs. for NDMC. Mr.Ashish Mohan, Adv. with Mr.Chetan Rai Wahi, Adv. for Sarojini Nagar Market Association. Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate with Mr. Abhay Singh and Mr. Raghvendra Pandey, Advocates for GNCTD. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner in the present writ petition is in the list of 628 persons who claimed that they have been continuously squatting at different sites in Sarojini Nagar area. W.P. (C) No.11562/2016 Page 1 of 3 2. During the course of hearing, an offer was made by Mr.Peechara, learned counsel for NDMC that NDMC would consider allotting sites to such persons who were r...
M/S Mehak Cusines Private Limited vs.government of National Capital Te ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2017
$~59 * % + W.P.(C) 1675/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:02. 03.2017 M/S MEHAK CUSINES PRIVATE LIMITED ........ Petitioner versus GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : Mr C.M.Lall, Ms Shobhana Takiar, Mr Prabhu Tandon and Ms Nancy Roy with Captain Arun Chopra, Director of the Company in person. Ms. Swaty S.Malik, Advocate with Mr A.K.Singh, designated officer. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT0203.2017 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) W.P.(C) 1675/2017 & CM No.7492/2017(stay) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made all compliances with regard to the deficiencies pointed out by the designated officer except installation of hands free taps and chimney. WP(C) 1675/2017 Page 1 of 3 2. Learned counsel submits that for both the above requirements, orders have been placed and the same are likely to be in...
Raj Bahadur & Ors. Vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2017
* + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on : March 02nd, 2017 CRL.A. No.736/2000 RAJU SINGH & ANR. ..... Appellants Through Mr.K.S. Singh, Adv. with Ms.Tripta, Adv. & Mr.Rahul, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, APP for the State with SI Kamal Kumar WITH CRL.A. No.742/2000 RAJ BAHADUR & ORS. Through Mr.K.S. Singh, Adv. with Ms.Tripta, Adv. & Mr.Rahul, Adv. ..... Appellants versus STATE Through Mr.Ashish Dutta, APP for the State with SI Kamal Kumar. ..... Respondent AND CRL.A. No.743/2000 & Crl.M.A. No.12786/2013 VIJAY PAL & ORS. ..... Appellants Through Mr.K.S. Singh, Adv. with Ms.Tripta, Adv. & Mr.Rahul, Adv. versus STATE Crl. A. Nos.736, 742 & 743 of 2000 ..... Respondent Page 1 of 13 Through Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, APP for the State with SI Kamal Kumar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.JUDGMENT1 The present appeals have been preferred against a common judgment of conviction dated 17.11.2000 and common order on senten...
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.siddharth Jain & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: March 02, 2017 (i) + MAC.APP. 345/2008 ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD. Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate ..... Appellant Versus SIDDHARTH JAIN & ORS. Through: Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Advocate ........ RESPONDENTS (ii) + MAC.APP. 483/2008 SIDDHARTH JAIN ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Versus Advocate RAJNEESH DAGAR ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate for Insurer HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT % ORAL1 In the above captioned two appeals, challenge is to common Mac.App.345/2008 Mac.App.483/2008 Page 1 of 9 impugned award of 27th March, 2008 vide which compensation of 22,57,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum has been granted to Injured on account of injuries sustained by him in a road accident on 24th November, 2004. The extent of permanent disability suffered by the Injured in the lower limb has been assessed to be 40% and the functional disability has been taken...
- ‹ Prev
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 64
- 65
- 66
- Next ›
- Last »