Delhi Court May 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.
Rakesh Kumar & Anr. Vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~S.B.-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4519/2017 & CM No.19732/2017 % Date of decision:23. d May, 2017 RAKESH KUMAR & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Abhishek Singh Baghel, Mr. Ashish Verma and Mr.Mukesh Bhutani, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ....... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr. Amit Bansal, Ms. Rajul Jain, Ms. Manish Singh and Ms. Seema, Advs. for R-1 & 2. Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal with Ms. Disha Malhotra, Advs. for University of Delhi. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE W.P.(C) 4519/2017 1. Issue notice to show cause as to why rule nisi be not issued to the respondents. Mr. Amit Bansal, ld. counsel accepts notice for respondents no.1 and 2. WP (C) No.4519/2017 Page 1 of 16 2. We accept the oral prayer made by Mr. Sanjay Jain, ld. ASG and direct the impleadment of University of Delhi as party respondent no.6 ...
National Insurance Co Ltd. Vs.beena Devi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
Decided on:23. d May, 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. $~47 * % + MAC.APP. 1013/2014 & CM Nos.18289-90 & 44841 of 2016 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI BEENA DEVI & ORS. Through: Mr.Anshuman Bal, Advocate for... RESPONDENTS No.1 to 3. Through: Mr. Arihant Jain for Mrs. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate. ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS Versus NAJMI WAZIRI, J (Oral) 1. A motor vehicle accident on 05.12.2011 claimed the life of one Mr. Rakesh Kumar Saini. His kin were awarded an amount of Rs.44,13,304/- alongwith interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition i.e. 22.12.2011 till its realization. Of the amount awarded, a sum of Rs.41,78,304/- was granted towards loss of dependency while the remaining amount was for non-pecuniary compensation. He was survived by his wife, two children and mother. The latter has since passed away.2. The appellants have questioned the computation of loss of dependency on ...
Rupesh Ranjan vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2681/2016 Reserved on:3. d May, 2017 Pronounced on:23. d May, 2017 RUPESH RANJAN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. J.K. Singh, Adv. with petitioner in person. versus STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, ASC for the State with Mr. Siddharth Sindhu, Adv. Mr. Praveen Kumar, Adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA1 ORDER On 25.06.2016, the second respondent herein made a complaint in writing to the Station House Officer (SHO) of Police Station Timar Pur Delhi and since the said complaint disclosed commission of certain acts constituting a cognizable offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) within the meaning of Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), First Information Report (FIR) No.300/2016 was registered thereupon.2. In the said FIR, the petitioner herein is referred to as the perpetrator of the above said offence. The petitio...
Main Sadar Bazar Traders Association (Regd.) vs.north Municipal Corpor ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:23. d May, 2017 + MAIN SADAR BAZAR TRADERS ASSOCIATION (REGD.) W.P. (C) No.11645/2016 Through Mr.Nikhil Singhvi, Adv. with ........ Petitioner versus Ms.Nikita Pandey, Adv. NORTH MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS Through Mr.Mukesh Gupta, Standing Counsel ........ RESPONDENTS with Mr.Sanjeev Garg, Adv. for NDMC, along with Mr.Sanjay Kumar, L.I., NDMC, in person. Mr.Devesh Singh, ASC for GNCTD. Insp. Ramesh Kumar, SHO and SI Prakash, PS Sadar Bazar, in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present petition has been instituted by the Main Sadar Bazar Traders Association, a body duly registered under the Societies Registration Act. Following prayers are sought by the petitioner:-"A. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate order of direction to Respondent No.1 to 3 directing them to remove illegal squatters/hawkers from the Sadar Bazar ar...
Mohd Aslam vs.mohd Akram
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: May 23, 2017 + CM(M) No.144/2017 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Kamal Jindal, Advocate. MOHD ASLAM versus ..... Respondent Through: None. MOHD AKRAM CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI JUDGMENT (Oral) 1. The petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 5th December, 2016 whereby the application filed by the petitioner/defendant under Order VIII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure has been dismissed by the learned Trial Court.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay in filing the written statement was only by 45 days and despite the delay being satisfactorily explained by the petitioner/defendant, the learned Trial Court ordered that the written statement filed by him be taken off the record and his defence was struck off.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent/plaintiff c...
Yogesh Chandra Jhalani vs.industrial Finance Corporation of India & Or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~3 & 4. * + W.P.(C) 4850/2015 and CM APPL. 8750/2015 YOGESH CHANDRA JHALANI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Anil Sapra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aman Vachher, Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Mr. Kartik Bhardwaj and Ms. Piyusha Singh, Advocates versus INDUSTRIAL FINANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. R.P. Agarwal, Mr. Sahil and Ms. Shibani, Advocates for R-1/IFCI. Mr. Sugam Seth and Ms. Yamini Khurana, Advocates for R-3/IDBI. Mr. Ramesh Kumar, Advocate for R-4. + W.P.(C) 11435/2015 and CM APPL. 30146/2015 PRAKASH CHANDRA JHALANI AND ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Anil Sapra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aman Vachher, Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Mr. Kartik Bhardwaj and Ms. Piyusha Singh, Advocates versus INDUSTRIAL FINANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. R.P. Agarwal, Mr. Sahil and Ms. Shibani, Advocates for R-1/IFCI. Mr. Sugam Seth and Ms. Yamini Khurana, Advocates for R-3/IDBI. Mr. Ramesh Kumar, Advoc...
M/S Rajpur Hydro Power Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs.m/s Ptc India Financial Ser ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~66. * + % LPA4012017 & C.M. No.19750/2017 Date of Decision:23. 05.2017 M/S RAJPUR HYDRO POWER PVT LTD & ORS..... Appellants Through: Mr. Muneesh Malhotra, Advocate along with Mr. Rituraj Shahi, Advocate. versus M/S PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajeeve Mehra, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. Mayank Mishra and Mr. Ritunjay Gupta, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) Cav. 513/2017 1. Since the Caveator has put in appearance, the caveat stands discharged. CM No.19751/2017 (exemption) 2. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. LPA4012017 Page 1 of 25 LPA4012017 3. Notice. Mr. Mayank Mishra, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.4. With consent of parties, arguments have been heard, and we proceed to dispose of this Letters patent appeal.5. The appellant has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal to assail the judgment dated 08.05.2017 pa...
Dharam Chand Ladha Mal vs.subhash Sabun Udyog & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
4 $~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 1602/2016 & I.As. 4643/2015 AND87342015 DHARAM CHAND LADHA MAL Through: Ms. Aparna Jain, Advocate. ..... Plaintiff versus SUBHASH SABUN UDYOG & ORS Through: Mr. Naveen Kumar Raheja, Advocate for defendant No.1. Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Singh, Advocate for defendant No.11. ..... Defendants Date of Decision:23. d May, 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (Oral):1. Present suit has been filed for permanent injunction, passing off, infringement of trade mark, damages etc. The prayer clause is reproduced hereinbelow:-"a) Restrain the Defendants, its servants, agents, partner, associates, and all other persons acting for and on their behalf from selling, advertising or marketing its products under the mark NIROKHA SOAP or NIROKHA SABUN or NAROLKALA SOAP OR NAROLKALA SABUN any other CS(COMM) 1602/2016 Page 1 of 4 mark similar with that of the Plaintiffs mark to stop infringement of registered trade mark of the Pla...
Molly Das vs.the Principal Secretary (Health) and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~62. * + % W.P.(C) 4505/2017 MOLLY DAS versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:23. 05.2017 Through: Mr. M.P. Raju, Advocate. ........ Petitioner THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HEALTH) AND ORS Through: Mr. Rahul Sharma & Mr. C.K. Bhatt, Advocates for respondents No.1 to 6. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) C.M. No.19679/2017 1.2. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 4505/2017 and C.M. Nos.19677/2017, 19678/2017 & 19680/2017 3. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 11.05.2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (the Tribunal) in O.A. No.1561/2017. The W.P.(C) 4505/2017 Page 1 of 14 Tribunal has dismissed the said Original Application.4. The petitioner had preferred the said Original Application before the Tribunal to assail the orders dated 25.04.2017...
Deepa Jain vs.kamlesh Jain & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: May 23, 2017 + CM(M) 978/2016 DEEPA JAIN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Ashok Mathur & Ms.Nidhi Agrawal, Advocates. versus Through: Mr.Kamlesh Jain, R-1 in person ........ RESPONDENTS KAMLESH JAIN & ORS CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI JUDGMENT (Oral) CM No.357(delay) 1. For the reasons stated in the application delay of 8 days in re-filing the petition is condoned.2. The application is disposed of. CM(M) 978/2016 1. The petitioner is feeling aggrieved by the order dated 16th May, 2016 in Civil Suit No.85/2016, whereby his application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment to plaint has been dismissed.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the amendment sought to be made in the plaint could not have been disallowed by the learned Trial Court for the reasons that necessary averments in respect of the 100 shares now sought to be recovered, have already been made in the plaint. At the time of...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »