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.
Niraj Sharma vs.harvinder Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: April 18, 2017 $~A-1 * % + CM(M) 1040/2016 NIRAJ SHARMA ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Sudarshan Rajan and Mr.Arjun Gadhoke, Advs. HARVINDER SINGH versus ..... Respondent Through Mr.Kirti Uppal, Sr.Adv. with Mr.T.D.Sharma and Mr.Ujjawal Jha, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) CM No.8736/2016 in CM(M)1040/2016 1. By the present application the applicant seeks recalling of order dated 17.10.2016 passed by this court by which one final opportunity was granted to the petitioner to cross-examine PW-4 on a date to be fixed by the trial court.2. The petitioner/defendants No.1 to 3 had filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to impugn the order dated 03.09.2016 by which an application filed by the petitioner under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC for recalling of two witnesses, namely, PW-2 and PW-4 for their cross-examination was dismissed. The respondent has filed the present suit ...
Manju Taneja vs.l.s. Pawar & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % MANJU TANEJA RSA No.112/2017 18th April, 2017 ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate. versus L.S. PAWAR & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. No.13880/2017 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. RSA1122017 and C.M. Appl. Nos. 13879/2017 (for condonation of delay of 130 days in filing the appeal) & 13878/2017 (for stay) 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 Trial Court dated 4.3.2015 and the First Appellant Court dated 14.7.2016; by which the courts below have decreed the suit for damages at Rs.10,000/- per month with effect RSA No.112/2017 Page 1 of 3 from 1.5.2006 with respect to the suit property being No.1114/11, 2nd floor, right side, Govindpu...
V Vikraman vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved On:10. h April, 2017 Judgment Pronounced On:18. h April, 2017 + W.P. (C) 2328/2007 V VIKRAMAN Through :... Petitioner in person ....... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Mr.Bhagwan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr.Shambhu Chaturvedi, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 25.10.2005 passed by the respondents imposing a penalty of reduction to the lowest stage in the time-scale of pay for a period of two years, with further directions that he will not earn increments of pay during the period of such reduction and that the reduction will have the effect of postponing the future increments of his pay upon the petitioner as well as the consequential reliefs of granting special duty allowance and senior time scale w.e.f. 04.04.2001.2. This matter was heard by a Division Bench of this Court. Since there was a difference o...
k.l.chhabra vs.punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: April 18, 2017 ........ Petitioner Through: Ms. Monica Kapoor, Advocate + W.P.(C) 307/2012 K.L. CHHABRA Versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Jagat Arora and Mr. Rajat Arora, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % ORAL JUDGMENT The Appropriate Government had made the following Reference:-"Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank, New Delhi in not paying payment of the recovery of due amounts & benefits as mentioned in the claim application dated 7.5.2007 and benefits of Shri K.L. Chhabra is just, fair and legal?. What relief the workman concerned is entitled to and from which date?. After framing of issues and upon recording of evidence, learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) has answered the first issue by holding that the Reference made did not come within the ambit of Industrial Dispute for want of W.P.(C) 307/2012 Page 1 of...
Ishwar Singh and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
$~56 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgement delivered on:18. h April, 2017 + W.P.(C) 9325/2015 & CM No.21598/2015 ISHWAR SINGH AND ORS. Through : Mr.Sumit Bansal, Adv. ........ Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Mr.Vijay Joshi and Ms.Meenakshi Pandr, Adv. Pandey, Advs. for R-1 Mr.Siddharth LAC/L&B Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal and Mr.Hem Kumar, Advs. for DDA for CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(Oral) 1. The dispute is qua the land comprising of 1 bigha 0 biswa and 8 biswani, forming part of khasra no.701/486/232(5-02) situated in revenue estate of Village Jasola, New Delhi. The land is recorded in the names of Jeet Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Bhim Singh, Jai Singh all sons of Hardhyan Singh and also in the name of Ishwar Singh son of Ganpat and late Smt. Jwala Devi. Now that Sukhdev Singh, Bhim Singh, Jai Singh and Smt. Jwala Devi have since expired, hence the petitioners No.1 to 12...
Narender Kumar vs.surender Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % NARENDER KUMAR RSA No.115/2017 18th April, 2017 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. K.K. Sharma and Mr. S. Khan, Advocates. versus SURENDER SINGH ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. No.14252/2017 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. RSA No.115/2017 and C.M. Appl. No.14253/2017 condonation of delay of 262 days in filing the appeal) (for 1. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed against the impugned judgment of the First Appellate Court dated 8.3.2016 refusing to condone the delay of about one year in filing of the first appeal. RSA No.115/2017 Page 1 of 3 2. The first appellate court has given the following valid reasons in paras 6 to 9 of the impugned judgment, and which paras read as under:-"6. Perusal of the record shows that present ap...
Apoorve Jain 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...
New Delhi Municipal Council vs.harish Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: April 18, 2017 + W.P.(C) 7102/2012 & C.M.18363/2012 NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Vivek B. Saharya, Additonal Standing Counsel versus HARISH KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Atul T.N., Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT % ORAL A Reference was made to the Tribunal as to whether non- employment of respondent-workman by petitioner-Management is legal and justified and the said Reference has been answered vide impugned Award of 3rd November, 2011 with direction to petitioner-Management to take respondent-workman on its regular Muster Roll as per his seniority in pursuance to its Circular of 11th April, 1996 (Ex.WW1/7). The undisputed facts, as noted in the impugned Award, are as under: - It is not disputed between the parties that vide order dated 11.4.96 passed by Director (Personnel) of the management, a seniority list of those workmen who had completed 500 days upto 31.8.95...
Pintu vs.the State & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
+ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(CRL) 1014/2017 Date of Hearing & Order: April 18th , 2017 PINTU ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Narendra Gautam, Adv. with petitioner in person. versus THE STATE & ANR ..... Respondent Through Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, APP for Mr.Ashish Aggarwal, ASC for the State with ASI Rajender Singh, PS Vikas Puri. Respondent no.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sh. Pintu for quashing of FIR No.489/2014 dated 04.07.2014, under Section 354-A IPC registered at Police Station Vikas Puri, Delhi on the basis of an agreement/settlement executed between petitioner and respondent no.2 namely, Smt. Monika. W.P (Crl). 1014/2017 Page 1 of 7 for Learned Additional Public Prosecutor 2. respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2 present in the Court has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant in the FIR in question.3. The fa...
Vijay Dixit vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2017
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:12. h April, 2017 Decided on:18. h April, 2017 BAIL APPLN. 2153/2016 VIJAY DIXIT STATE ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Manoj Ohri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Arun Srivastava and Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocates. versus Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the ..... Respondent State with Inspector Satya Prakash, EOW. Mr. Nishant Datta and Mr. Amod Sharma, Advocates for the complainant/Association. Mr. Aashish George and Mr. R.K. Jeenwal, Advocates for complainants Pradeep Malhotra and Pooja Malhotra. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 By the present petition the petitioner seeks bail in case FIR No.82/2011 for offences punishable under Sections 409/420/120B IPC at PS Economic Offences Wing, Delhi on the complaint of Lt. Col. Surinder Pal Singh Aurora.2. The allegations in the complaint against the petitioner and his wife, who were the promoters of M/s Senior Mall having its registered office at 1/1, Shanti Niketan, New...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »