Delhi Court January 2018 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.
mrs.poonam Khanna vs.state & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Crl.M.C.No.3690/2016 Judgment reserved on :11. h January, 2018 Date of decision :30. h January, 2018 MRS.POONAM KHANNA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Yakesh Anand & Ms. Sonam Anand, Advocate STATE & ORS versus Through: Mr. Raghuvinder Varma, APP ..... RespondentS for State with Inspector Ajay Gupta, EOW, Delhi Police. Mr.Mandeep Singh Vinaik & Mr. Deepak Bashta, Adv for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT ANU MALHOTRA, J.1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner, Mrs. Poonam Khanna, W/o Late Sh. Pradeep Kumar Khanna seeks invocation of powers of this Court under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking partial quashing of the FIR No.11/2011, dated 15.2.2011, under Sections 403/404/406/409/420/120-B Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station Tuglak Road, New Delhi and all proceedings emanating therefrom against her and seeks that her name be dropped from the list of accused and that the proceedings be continued ag...
Mahant P. L. Mangal Dass Alias Piare Lal (Deceased Thr His Legal Heirs ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2018
$~4 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"30th January, 2018 CM(M) 384/2015 and CM APPL.7977/2015 (stay) MAHANT P. L. MANGAL DASS ALIAS PIARE LAL (DECEASED THR HIS LEGAL HEIRS) Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja, Advocate with Ms. Chandrika Gupta, Advocate ........ Petitioners versus RAVI KUMAR JUNEJA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. O.P. Jatav, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. A Civil Suit (CS No.30/10/90) was instituted by the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners seeking relief of permanent injunction against interference in his possession over the premises which he described as Shri Katas Raj Dham Ashram, Raghubir Nagar, Tagore Garden Extension, New Delhi. Pertinent to note here that the said plaintiff had pleaded, inter alia, that he was mahant, founder and trustee of the said ashram having constructed and built the super- structure in question. He described the respondents, who were impleaded as defendants as local residents who we...
Kamlesh vs.govt of Nct of Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2018
$~46 to 50 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:30. h January, 2018 ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS ........ RESPONDENTS KAMLESH GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS JITENDER GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS + W.P.(C) 1371/2017 versus + W.P.(C) 1390/2017 versus + W.P.(C) 1391/2017 CHAMAN SINGH GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. + W.P.(C) 1448/2017 CHARAN SINGH GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. + W.P.(C) 1457/2017 versus Present: Mr.Sunil K.Goel and Mr.Lalit Kumar Rawal, Advocate for the SATBIR GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS ........ RESPONDENTS ........ RESPONDENTS versus versus ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner petitioners in all the matters. Mr.Yeeshu Jain and Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for the LAC/L&B deptt. in all the matters. Mr.Arun Birbal and Mr.Sanjay Singh, Advocates for the DDA in W.P.(C) 1371/2017 & W.P.(C) 1448/2017. Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, standing counsel with Mr.Hem Kumar and Ms.Simmee Kumari, Advts. ...
Siemens Limited vs.jindal India Thermal Power Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:30. 01.2018 ARB.P. 243/2017 SIEMENS LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Jayant Malik, Adv. $~OS-8 * % + versus JINDAL INDIA THERMAL POWER LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Ms.Suruchi Agarwal and Mr.Sushil Bhatt, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) IA No.4378/2017 (exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. ARB.P. 243/2017 1. This petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) seeking appointment of an arbitrator on behalf of the respondent. Some of the salient facts as stated in the petition are that the respondent issued a tender dated 29.04.2011 for design, engineering, etc. of equipment/items for extension of itsKV Angul Pooling Station (Power Grid) complete in all respects along with metering yard and civil work etc.2. On 21.07.2011, the bid of the petitioner was accepted and a letter of intent was entered into b...
Cbi vs.shrikant Jain & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CBI Judgment Reserved on :12. 10.2017 Date of Judgment:29. 01.2018 W.P. (CRL.) 2865/2017 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Nikhil Goel and Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, SPP for CBI. SHRIKANT JAIN & ORS. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. P.R. Aggarwal, Advocate along with Mr. Arun Srivastava and Mr. Y.R. Sharma, Advocate for R1. Mr. K.K. Patra, Advocate for R2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL VINOD GOEL, J.1. The Central Bureau of Investigation has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articleof the Constitution of India for quashing of the impugned order dated 26.09.2017 passed by the Court of Learned Special Judge-III, CBI Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (in short Ld. Special Judge) in Sessions Case No.27285/2016 titled as CBI Vs. Shrikant Jain & Anr. W.P (Crl) 2865/2017 Page 1 of 13 2. By the impugned order, the Ld. Special Judge has imposed a costs of Rs.10,000/- upon the Director of Prosecution, CBI for causing delay in adju...
Ajit Singh vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : JANUARY29 2018 + CRL.REV.P. 796/2014 AJIT SINGH ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.Prag Chawla, Advocate. STATE versus ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Ravi Nayak, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner-Ajit Singh to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated 18.11.2014 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Crl.A.No.1by which the findings of the learned Trial Court recorded by a judgment dated 19.12.2013 convicting the petitioner for commission of offence under SectionsIPC were confirmed. The Trial Court had sentenced the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for one year with fine `1,000/-. In appeal the substantive sentence was modified and reduced to simple imprisonment for six months with fine `25,000/-. The revision petition is contested by the respondent. Crl.Rev.P.796/2014 Page 1 of 6 2. Learned counsel for the petition...
Eminence Exhibition Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8768/2017 and CM Nos. 35898-35899/2017 & 42006/2017 Date of decision :29. 01.2018 EMINENCE EXHIBITION SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashish Virmani, Mr. Binay Kumar and Mr. Sarvpreet Singh, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Kirtiman Singh and Mr.Waize Ali Noor, Mr. Prateek Dhanda and Mr. Saeed Qadri, Advs. for R-1 & R-2. Mr. Rishikant Singh and Mr. Rajit Singh, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL) % The petitioner challenges its tenders rejection in the technical bid and financial bid for OTDYKH, Moscow, Russia and related fairs, for which tenders for services were invited. The petitioner was one of the participants in the tenders and had bid for construction of India Pavilion at various locales such as Moscow and St. Petersburg (Russia), Warsaw (Poland), Stuttgart (Germany), Te...
Kamlesh Kumar vs.ravi Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~5 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO4572016 KAMLESH KUMAR Judgment delivered on:29. 01.2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sudhir Naagar and Ms. Chetna Singh, Advs. versus RAVI KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J (Oral) 1. None appears for the respondent despite a passover of the case in the pre-lunch session.2. This appeal impugns an order dated 29.03.2016 which allowed the respondent/claimants claim for compensation for permanent disability of 50% physical disability, resulting in 100% loss of earning capacity, under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923.3. The appellant has argued that substantial question of law raised in the petition is whether in the absence of any material evidence, the claimant can be considered to be an employee of the appellant?. FAO4572016 Page 1 of 7 4. It was the case of the respondent/claimant that he was employed from March, 2014 as a driver for a medical ambulance service run by the...
Dilbagh Singh & Anr. Vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~ * + STATE + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A.434/2000 Reserved on: January 5, 2018 Decided on: January 29, 2018 DILBAGH SINGH & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Mohit Mathur, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vikas Walia, Mr.Sumit Misra, Advocates. Versus Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP. ..... Respondent CRL.A.463/2000 PRATEEK Through: Mr. Mohd. Shahrukh Hussain, ..... Appellant STATE Advocate Versus Through: Ms.Radhika Kolluru, APP. ..... Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA % Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: JUDGMENT1 These appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 7th July 2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ), Delhi in Crl.A. 434/2000 & Crl.A. 463/2000 Page 1 of 28 Sessions Case No.103 of 1998 arising out of FIR No.71 of 1998 registered at Police Station (PS) Nangloi convicting the Appellants for the offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the order on sentence dated 8th July 2000 of the...
Mohd. Mubarak & Anr. Vs.lalit Mohan Sharma & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~49 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"29th January, 2018 CM (M) 108/2018 and CM APPL.3388-3389/2018 MOHD. MUBARAK & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: M. Rais Farooqui, Advocate. versus + LALIT MOHAN SHARMA & ANR. Through: ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioners are the defendants in civil suit (CS No.2943/16) instituted by the respondents seeking reliefs in the nature of possession and permanent injunction in respect of shop at ground floor in property No.S-451, School Block, Shakarpur, Delhi-110092 and declaration to the effect that the documents dated 20.12.1989, on which the petitioners (defendants) claim interest in the subject property are null and void, besides damages/mesne profits.2. By the impugned order dated 16.10.2017, the Additional District Judge (ADJ) dismissed their application for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) primarily on the ground of li...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »