Delhi Court April 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.
Yogesh Jain & Anr. Vs.rakesh Jain &Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI O.M.P. 455/2012 YOGESH JAIN & ANR. Reserved on: February 28, 2017 Date of decision: April 18, 2017 ...... Petitioners Through: Mr. Avadh Kaushik, Mr Pankaj Kumar, Mr. Devashish Maharishi & Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Advocates. versus RAKESH JAIN &ORS. ...... RESPONDENTS Through: Respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4 in person. + O.M.P. 688/2012 AND APOORVE JAIN ...Petitioner Through: Mr. Avadh Kaushik, Mr Pankaj Kumar, Mr. Devashish Maharishi & Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Advocates. versus RAKESH JAIN & ORS. ...Respondents Through: Respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4 in person. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR % JUDGMENT1804.2017 1. These are two petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) challenging the impugned interim award OMP4552012 & 688/2012 Page 1 of 42 dated 1st April 2010 passed by the learned sole Arbitrator in the disputes between the parties. While OMP No.455 of 2012 has been filed by Yogesh Jain (Petitioner No.1) and Preeti Jain (Petiti...
P K M Selvam vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
$~86 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(C) 3143/2017 Judgment delivered on:18. 04.2017 P K M SELVAM UNION OF INDIA & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS versus Mr Brijdender Chahar, Senior Advocate with Mr S.Nithin and Ms Preeti Singh. : Mr Vikas Mahajan and Mr S.S.Rai for R-1. For the... RESPONDENTS CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1804.2017 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner, by the present petition, seeks a direction to the Adjudicating Authority to grant time to the petitioner to file English translation of all the Tamil documents in compliance of Regulation 3 of the Adjudicating Authority (Procedure) Regulations, 2013 issued under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA, 2002).2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of Regulation 3 of the said Regulations, all documents have to be in language either Hindi or English. W.P.(C) No.3143...
Haldiram Snacks Pvt. Ltd. Vs.megha Enterprises & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
$~OS-37 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ARB.P. 421/2016 Date of decision:18. 04.2017 HALDIRAM SNACKS PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Sanjeev Sindhwani, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Varun Goswami, Mr.Rishi Manchanda and Mr.Naveen Grover, Advs. MEGHA ENTERPRISES & ORS. versus ..... Respondent Through Mr.B.Shravanth Shantam and Mr.Pranay Sahni, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. By the present petition filed under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 the petitioner seeks appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to enter upon reference and adjudicate upon the disputes said to have arisen between the parties.2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.1 is a partnership firm of which respondents No.2 to 4 are the partners. Pursuant to an order said to have been received by the erstwhile M/s.Coral Products Private Limited (predecessor of the petitioner company) the petitioners imported Crude Palm Oil...
National Highways Authority of India vs.bridge & Roof Co. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: February 27, 2017 Date of decision: April 18, 2017 O.M.P. 1203/2013 + NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA Through: Mr. Arun Batta, Advocate. ........ Petitioner BRIDGE & ROOF CO. LTD. ..... Respondent versus Through: Dr. P.C. Markanda, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajesh Markanda, Mr. A.P. Dhamija and Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, Advocates. AND O.M.P. 248/2014 + NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA Through: Mr. Arun Batta, Advocate. ........ Petitioner BRIDGE & ROOF CO. LTD. ..... Respondent versus Through: Dr. P.C. Markanda, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajesh Markanda, Mr. A.P. Dhamija and Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT1804.2017 OMP Nos.1203/2013 & 248/2014 Page 1 of 24 1. These are two petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) against Bridge & Roof Company Limited (hereafter Respondent/Contractor) challengin...
Natho Devi vs.tek Chand & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % NATHO DEVI RSA No.94/2017 18th April, 2017 Through: Mr. and Mr.Bhupendra Kumar Bhardwaj, Advocates. ..... Appellant Arijeet Singh versus TEK CHAND & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the first appellate court dated 20.10.2016 and the trial court dated 23.12.2015; by which the courts below have dismissed the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff for possession, declaration and mesne profits with respect to the property bearing No.1/2300-B, Mandoli Road, Shahdara, Delhi 110032 having an area of 100 sq. yards (hereinafter referred to as the suit property) RSA No.94/2017 Page 1 of 5 2. Appellant is the wife of respondent No.1/defendant No.1/Tek Chand. Appellant had executed documents being the Agreem...
Satyawati vs.suraj Bhan & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
$~24 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 170/2017 & IAs No.4587/2017 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC), 4588/2017 (for exemption from filing original documents) & 4589/2017 (for condonation of 92 days delay in re-filing) SATYAWATI Through: Mr. Virender Kumar Sharma & Ms. ..... Plaintiff Suman Rani, Advs. Versus SURAJ BHAN & ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW Through: None. ..... Defendants ORDER1804.2017 The plaintiff has sued her father and siblings for partition of % 1. immovable property claimed to have been inherited by the father (defendant no.1 Suraj Bhan) from his own father namely Inder Raj pleading (i) that the plaintiff and the defendants are members of Joint Hindu family; (ii) that the plaintiff by this suit is seeking partition of Joint Hindu property in respect of ancestral properties and other properties purchased from the fund of ancestral properties; (iii) that the plaintiff till date has not been given any share in the properties; (iv) that the plaint...
Milap Chand vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
$~31 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI MILAP CHAND W.P.(C) 10111/2016 Date of decision:18. h April, 2017 ........ Petitioner Through Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Tinu Bajwa and Mr. Amandeep Joshi, Advocates. UNION OF INDIA & ORS versus ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sanjib K. Mohanty, Sr. Panel Central Government Counsel for the UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) Milap Chand has filed the present writ petition with the following prayers:-"In view of facts and circumstances stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Honble Court be pleased to:-"(i) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the respondents impugned letter dated 24.09.2015 vide which they have rejected the petitioners representation dated 22.07.2015; (ii) the respondents to depute the petitioner for deputation to Embassy of India, Nepal, for which the respondents have already intimated to the petitioner about his said selectio...
Major Gulshan Kumar (Retd.) vs.delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~ * + W.P.(C) 11406/2015 & CM APPLs.30060/2015, 26919/2016 MAJOR GULSHAN KUMAR (RETD.) ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Mund, Advocate with Mr. K.K. Malvaya and Mr. Amarnath Jaiwal, Advocates. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Through: Mr. B.S. Dhir, Advocate for DDA. ..... Respondent % 22nd March, 2017 Reserved on: Date of Decision:18. h April, 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: THE ISSUE1 The issue that arises for consideration is as to what is the legal wrong that has been committed by respondent-DDA in not allotting a shop to a successful tenderer for nearly twenty years after receipt of entire consideration?.2. It is pertinent to mention that present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent-DDA to allot a shop of similar size that had been allotted to the petitioner in 1996 as well as to award compensation for the delay in allotting a shop. W.P.(C) 11406/2015 Page 1 of 27 FA...
Delhi Development Authority vs.gammon India Ltd & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
$~ * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI OMP62009 Reserved on: March 14, 2017 Date of decision: April 18, 2017 GAMMON INDIA LTD & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. P.H. Parekh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sumit Goel and Ms. Raveena Rai, Advocates. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajesh Manchanda with Mr. Rajat Manchanda, Mr Rahul Rai, Mr. Mohit Gupta, and Mr. Rameez Raju, Advocates. AND OMP6742008 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Manchanda with Mr. Rajat Manchanda, Mr Rahul Rai, Mr. Mohit Gupta, and Mr. Rameez Raju, Advocates. versus GAMMON INDIA LTD & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. P.H. Parekh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sumit Goel and Ms. Raveena Rai, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR % JUDGMENT1804.2017 1. These are two petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and OMP Nos 6/2009 & 674/2008 Page 1 of 13 Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) challenging the impugned Award dated 11th September 2008 pas...
K L Bhasin vs.milind Kharat & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
32 $~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CONT.CAS(C) 468/2016 K L BHASIN Through: Mr. Umesh Mishra, Advocate. ........ Petitioner versus MILIND KHARAT & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Ananya De, Advocate for Mr. A.K. De, Advocate. Date of Decision:18. h April, 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present contempt petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of order dated 13th March, 2015 passed in W.P.(C) 4293/2014 whereby respondent No.1 was directed to accept resignation of petitioner dated 17th November, 2009 and was further directed to pay the dues payable to the petitioner as a resigned employee within three months after deducting three months notice pay.2. Learned counsel for petitioner states that vide e-mail dated 06th July, 2015, respondent No.1 denied the petitioner any benefits in accordance with amended Scheme 2010. He states that though the petitioner gave his resignation vide letter dated 17th November, 2009, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »