Delhi Court August 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.
Ranjeet Prasad & Ors. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
$~36 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(CRL) 2459/2017 RANJEET PRASAD & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate along with petitioners in person. versus STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Anya Singh, Advocate for Mr.Avi Singh, ASC for the State with SI Kamlesh, PS Sagarpur, Delhi. Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL ORDER3008.2017 % Crl.M.A. 14083/2017 (exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. W.P.(CRL) 2459/2017 1.2. 3. Notice. Learned APP, who appears on an advance copy having been served, accepts notice. Notice to respondent No.2 also. She is present in court and accepts notice. She is duly identified by IO SI Kamlesh. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.PC) W.P. (Crl.) 2459/2017 Page 1 of 4 4.5. 6.7. for quashin...
Veena Ramtri vs.state & Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
F-9 $~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI TEST.CAS. 61/2015 VEENA RAMTRI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Shravan Sahny, Advocate. versus STATE & OTHERS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Shekhar Kumar, Advocate for respondents No.3 to 5. Date of Decision:30. h August, 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (Oral):1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of probate in respect of Will dated 3rd April, 2013 of the deceased Ms.Promila Karnani.2. It has been averred in the petition that the petitioner is the sister of the deceased Ms.Promila Karnani, who expired on 20th April, 2014. The deceased is stated to have executed a Will dated 3rd April, 2013, which was duly attested by Mr. N. Subramaniam and Ms. Sri Charanya. The Will dated 3rd April, 2013 is reproduced hereinunder:-"WILL I Promila Karnani, maiden name Promila Ramtri, D/o late Sh.Moolchand Ramtri and late Smt.Lajwanti Ramtri, am m...
Jitender Srivastav & Ors vs.state of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
$~ * % + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:19. h May, 2017 Judgment delivered on 30 August, 2017 CRL.A. 36/2004 POONAM SRIVASTAV ..... Appellant Through : Mr.K.T.S. Tulsi, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Lalit Sankhla, Mr.Pawan Sankhla, Mr.Padam Sankhla, Mr.Raj Kamal and Ms.Pallavi Malhotra, Advs. Versus STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Mr.Pawan K. Bahl, Adv. for the complainant. CRL.A. 68/2004 JITENDER SRIVASTAV & ORS ..... Appellants Through : Mr.K.T.S. Tulsi, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Lalit Sankhla, Mr.Pawan Sankhla, Mr.Padam Sankhla, Mr.Raj Kamal and Ms.Pallavi Malhotra, Advs. Versus STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Mr.Pawan K. Bahl, Adv. for the complainant. Crl.A. 36/2004, 68/2004 & 85/2004 Page 1 of 46 + CRL.A. 85/2004 DEEPAK SRIVASTAV ..... Appellant Through : Mr.K.T.S. Tulsi, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Lalit Sankhla, Mr.Pawan Sankhla, Mr.Padam Sankhla, Mr.Raj Kamal and Ms.Pallavi Malhotra, Advs. Versus STATE OF DELHI .......
R P Meena vs.north Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision 30th August, 2017 W.P.(C) 7613/2017 R P MEENA ....... Petitioner Through Mr. Raman Duggal, Mr. Akshay Chaudhary and Ms. Aayushi Gupta, Advs. versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS ..... Respondent Through Mrs. Biji Rajesh, Adv for Mr. Gaurang Kanth, Adv. for NDMC, Mr. Kumar Rajesh Singh, Adv for R-2, Mr. Rajan Tyagi, ASC for R-3, Mr. Tarun Sharma, Adv. for Mr. Uttam Datt, Adv for R-5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI W.P.(C) 7613/2017 Page 1 of 11 REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL) C.M. No.31429/2017(for exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. C.M No.31428/2017(condonation of delay) For the reason stated in the application the same is allowed. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 7613/2017.1. The present Writ Petition assails the order dated 01.08.2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi...
Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.dharmender & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:30. h August, 2017 + MAC APPEAL6672016 and CM APPL.30971/2016, CM APPL.22931/2017 IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate versus DHARMENDER & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Saurabh Kansal, Advocate for R-2 & R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. On 28.07.2009, the first respondent was riding on the pillion of a motorcycle when it was hit by a three wheeler scooter bearing registration No.DL-1RF-2150 (TSR) and suffered injuries. The TSR was driven at the relevant point of time by the second respondent, it being registered in the name of the third respondent Bhim Sain (registered owner of the vehicle), and admittedly insured against third party risk with the appellant insurance company (insurer). The third respondent died on 27.10.2011 but the factum of his death was not brought on record before the tribunal during ...
Manoj & Anr. Vs.the State & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
$~3 & 5 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 1372/2017 MANOJ & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Deepak Sharma, Advocate with petitioners in person. versus THE STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Tarang Srivastava, APP for State with SI Ashok Kumar, PS South Campus, New Delhi. Through: Mr.Puneet Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Ms.Vasudha Bajaj, Advocate for R-2 & R-3 along with respondent No.2 and 3 in person. + W.P.(CRL) 730/2017 ASHISH SHARMA & ANR. ........ Petitioners STATE & ORS. Through: Mr.Puneet Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Ms.Vasudha Bajaj, Advocate along with petitioners in person. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Siddarth Sindhu, Advocate for Mr.Sanjay Lao, ASC for the State with SI Ashok Kumar, PS South Campus, New Delhi. Mr.Deepak Sharma, Advocate for R-2 and R-3 with respondent No.2 and 3 in person. CRL.M.C. 1372/2017 & W.P. (CRL.) 730/2017 Page 1 of 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL ORDER3008.2017 By this petition, being CRL.M.C. 1372/20...
Anita Aggarwal vs.exponential Financial Services
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA652007 ANITA AGGARWAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Shanmuga Patro, Advocate. versus EXPONENTIAL FINANCIAL SERVICES ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI (ORAL) ORDER3008.2017 P.S.TEJI, J.1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 96 read with Section 151 CPC against the judgment and decree dated 27.09.2006 passed by the Court below vide which a decree for a sum of Rs.10,84,437.57 with costs and interest @ 9% per annum from the date of judgment its realization was passed in favour of the plaintiff/respondent and against the appellant/defendant. till 2. The facts in brief are that a suit under Order 37 of the CPC for recovery of Rs.16,94,967.57 was filed by the plaintiff/respondent against the appellant/defendant. It was contended in the suit that the plaintiff/respondent was a registered member of National Stock Exchange. the appellant/defendant approached the plaintiff and desired to do...
Rashmi Cement Limited vs.enforcement Directorate
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2170/2017 RASHMI CEMENT LIMITED versus ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE Reserved on:22. 08.2017 Delivered on:30. 08.2017 ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr.Vikas Singh, Sr.Adv. with Dr.Shamsuddin, Mr.Satyanshu Mohan, Mr.Siddhartha Datta, Mr.Manu Nair, Ms.Suvarna Kashyap and Mr.Nitish Massey. For the Respondent: Mr.Sanjay Jain, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Ajay CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Digpaul, CGSC, Mr.Vidur Mohan, Ms.Mohita and Mr.Kartik Rai & Ms.Mohita. ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioner, a private limited Company, has challenged (i) the registration of ECIR No.07/2012/KOL/PMLA dated 18.04.2012 whereby commission of offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter called the Act) was prima facie found to have been made out for initiating detailed investigation under the Act; (ii) the original complaint No.78/2017 dated 13.06.2...
Sandhya Agarwal and Anr vs.jammu & Kashmir Bank and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SANDHYA AGARWAL AND ANR ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Neeraj K. Kaul, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aman Vachher and Mr. Ashutosh Dubey and Mr. Raghav, Advocates. versus $~27 * + W.P.(C) 7084/2017 & C.M. Nos. 31459-60/2017 JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK AND ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA % ORDER3008.2017 ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Rahul Narayanan, Advocate for R-1/Bank. Mr. Shashank Aggarwal, Advocate for R-2 & 3.1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 04.8.2017 passed by the learned DRAT in an appeal preferred by the respondent No.1/Bank against the order dated 25.7.2017, passed by the learned DRT-I, restraining the Bank from taking over physical possession of their residential premises, on their depositing a sum of Rs.50 lakhs along with a cheque for a sum of Rs.1.50 crores, on or before 28.7.2017.2. It is an undisputed position that the petitioners are in default of the order dated 25.7.2017...
Ved Prakash Yadav vs.sanjay Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A.866/2015 % VED PRAKASH YADAV Date of Decision:30. 08.2017 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.M. Sinha, Advocate. versus SANJAY KUMAR Through: Mr. A.K. Singh, Advocate. ..... Respondent CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J (ORAL) 1. The appellant has challenged the orders dated 05.02.2015 and 22.07.2015 passed in M No.by the Additional District Judge-6, South District, New Delhi whereby proceedings under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C has been initiated against him and a direction has been given for lodging a complaint against the appellant respectively.2. Facts which are necessary for the disposal of the present appeal are as hereunder.3. The respondent/Sanjay Kumar had entered into an agreement with the appellant for purchase of flat No.8, First Floor, Property No.21-22, Khasra No.29, Krishna Nagar, Humayunpur, Delhi for a consideration amount of Rs.40 lakhs. Pursuant to such an agreement, an amount of Rs.15 lakhs was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »