Delhi Court October 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.
M/S Kumar Industries vs.suresh Kumar Mittal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.489/2006 + % M/S KUMAR INDUSTRIES Through: versus 10th October, 2018 ..... Appellant Mr. Gupta, Advocate (M. No.9650546383). Pradhuman ..... Respondent SURESH KUMAR MITTAL Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant in the suit impugning the judgment of the Trial Court dated 05.04.2006 by which the trial court has decreed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff seeking a decree for a sum of Rs. 6,72,331/-, for an amount of Rs. 4,48,359/- alongwith interest @ 12% w.e.f. 17.09.2001.2. The facts of the case are that the respondent/plaintiff pleaded that he supplied to the appellant/defendant aluminum wires RFA No.489/2006 Page 1 of 6 vide Bill nos. 01, 07 and 011 dated 15.05.2000, 10.07.2000 and 30.09.2000 for a total sum of Rs. 5,38,247/-. To this amount o...
Pardeep Kumar & Ors vs.state (Govt of Nct) & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2018
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 4564/2018 Judgment delivered on:10.10.2018 PARDEEP KUMAR & ORS versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT) & ORS ........ Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners : Mr. Abhinav Tyagi with Mr. Chirag Mudgal, Advocates. For the... RESPONDENTS : CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Kamal Kumar Ghai, APP for the State. SI Davender, PS Dabri. JUDGMENT1010.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) Crl.M.A.31668/2018 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 4564/2018 1.... Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.816/2016 under Sections 448 IPC, Police Station Dabri, South West. CRL.M.C. 4564/2018 Page 1 of 3 2. Subject FIR was registered on the complaint of the respondents that petitioners had encroached upon their property. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the subject dispute had emanated as the petitioners were claiming to be the bonafide purchasers of t...
Ajay Kumar @ Bhenga vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 1150/2016 $~3&4 * + + RAVI KAPOOR STATE Through: Ms. Dimple Vivek, Advocate ..... Appellant versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ranbir Singh Kundu, ASC the State with (Crl.) Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State and Ms. Suman Saharan, Advocate. for CRL.A. 633/2017 AJAY KUMAR @ BHENGA Through: Mr. ..... Appellant Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocate with Ms. Manishi Bisht, Advocate. STATE versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ranbir Singh Kundu, ASC (Crl.) the State with Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State and Ms. Suman Saharan, Advocate. for CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VINOD GOEL Crl A No.1150 of 2016 and 633 of 2017 Page 1 of 27 % JUDGMENT1010.2018 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 26th August 2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, South District, Saket Courts (hereafter the trial Court), in SC No.40/2014 arising from FIR No.8/2009 registered at Police Station (PS) Vasant Kunj ...
Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd (Dmrc) & Ors vs.vinod Pratap Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2018
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10862/2016 & C.M. No.42557/2016 (for stay) 1. DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD (DMRC) & ORS Through: Mr.V.S.R. Krishna, Adv. ........ Petitioners versus VINOD PRATAP SINGH ..... Respondent Through: Mr.A.K. Trivedi & Mr.Naveen Kumar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI % ORDER1010.2018 The petitioner/DMRC has challenged the order dated 23.05.2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in OA No.4461/2013 filed by the respondent who was working on the post of a Customer Relation Assistant (CRA) and had prayed for quashing and setting aside an order dated 12.08.2013, passed by the Disciplinary Authority removing him from service w.e.f. 12.08.2013, upheld by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 02.12.2013.2. By the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the OA filed by the respondent and had quashed and set aside the orders dated 12.08.2013 and 02.12.2013 pass...
Saroj Aggarwal vs.mehar Singh & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:10. h October, 2018. RSA362018 & CM No.7634/2018 (for condonation of 80 days delay in re-filing the appeal) SAROJ AGGARWAL Through: Mr. Praveen Suri, Adv. ..... Appellant MEHAR SINGH & ORS Versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Yogendra Kumar Dwivedi, Adv. for R-1&2. Mr. Nirmal Kumar Agarwal, Adv. for R-3. Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Ms. Komal Sarout and Ms. Mrinalini Sharma, Advs. for SDMC. Mr. P. Raman Kumar Singh, Addl. SHO, Uttam Nagar. Mr. Jai Kishan Gautam, R-6 in person. Mr. Amarjeet Kumar, Adv. for R-7. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the judgment and decree [dated 5th August, 2017 in RCA No.325/2016 of the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge (West)]. of dismissal of First Appeal under Section 96 of the CPC preferred by the appellant against the judgment and decree [dated 12th July, 2013 in Suit No.221/2010 of ...
Rahul Singh & Ors vs.state ( Govt of Nct Delhi) & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2018
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 3454/2018 Judgment delivered on:10. 10.2018 RAHUL SINGH & ORS ........ Petitioners versus STATE ( GOVT OF NCT DELHI) & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners : For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. Abhay Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Kamal Kumar Ghai, APP for the State. Mr. Surender Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 in person. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1010.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) Crl.M.A.12546/2018 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.A.34069/2018 (for impleadment)... Petitioner by the application seeks impleadment of Mrs. Prem, who is also a co-accused as... Petitioner No.5. For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed. Mrs Prem is impleaded as petitioner No.5. Amended memo of parties is taken on record. Crl.M.C.3454/2018 Page 1 of 3 CRL.M.C. 3454/2018 1.... Petitioners seek quashing of F...
Manoj & Anr. Vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2018
$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 5209/2018 Judgment delivered on:10.10.2018 MANOJ & ANR. ........ Petitioners STATE & ANR versus ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: Mr. Sushil Kr. Jain, Adv. For the... Petitioner : For the... RESPONDENTS : CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, Addl. PP for the State with SI Kamal Kumar JUDGMENT1010.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.31/2017 under Sections 354/323/325/341/5IPC, Police Station Okhla Indl. Area, based on a settlement.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the prosecutrix had gone to shop to purchase certain articles and the petitioners under influence of alcohol misbehaved with her. CRL.M.C. 5209/2018 Page 1 of 3 3. Learned counsel for the parties submits that parties have settled their disputes with the intervention of residents of the locality and petitioners have apologised to the respondent No.2 and she has accepted the ...
Poonam and Ors vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2018
$~5 and 6. * + W.P.(C) 12047/2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI POONAM AND ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Through: Mr. Sarat Chandra, Advocate ........ RESPONDENTS + W.P.(C) 3323/2017 AND MADAN SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Poonam Kalia, Advocate UNION OF INDIA & ANR CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI % ORDER1010.2018 CM APPL. 13452/2018 (by the respondents for condonation of delay of 50 days in filing the counter affidavit) in W.P.(C) 12047/2016 1. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 50 days in filing the counter affidavit is condoned.2. The application is disposed of. W.P.(C) 12047/2016 [CM APPL. 47606/2016 (stay)]. and W.P.(C) 3323/2017 1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in issuing a Notification dated 08.11.2016, cancelling the recr...
Sushila and Ors. Vs.government of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: October 10, 2018 + W.P.(C) 9952/2018 & C.M. 38765/2018 1. SUSHILA AND ORS. Through: ........ Petitioners Mr. Sunil Chaudhary, Advocate Versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Devesh Singh, Addl. Standing Counsel (Civil) with Ms. Sukriti Ghai & Ms. Urvashi Tripathi, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of Notice of 13th September, 2018 is sought in this petition. In addition, prohibition on demolition of property situated in Khasra Nos. 1389 & 1390, situated in Block-G, Phase-VI, in the revenue estate of village Aya Nagar, New Delhi is also sought.2. Response to this petition by way of Status Report has been filed by respondent.3. Although it is the case of respondent that the subject land has not been urbanized but The Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2011, includes the village in question within its ambit.4. Without going into this aspect, it is deemed appropri...
Sandeep Singh Chandok & Ors vs.nancy & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2018
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:10. h October, 2018 + CRL.M.C. 2491/2015 SANDEEP SINGH CHANDOK & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Pradeep Mishra, Advocate versus along with petitioner No.1 in person. NANCY & ANR Through: Ms. Ekta with Mr. Ankit ........ RESPONDENTS Jhamb, Mr. Manish Kumar & Mr. Aman Gupta, Advocates for R-1 along with R-1 in person. Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State with SI Chandan, P.A. K.N.K. Marg. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The first respondent was married to the first petitioner as per Hindu Rites and Ceremonies on 28.11.2004 and from out of their wedlock, a female child named Ms. Sanmir Kaur took birth on 09.06.2008. On 24.03.2012 at the instance of the first respondent, Police Station K.N. Katju Marg registered FIR No.1wherein the first petitioner had leveled allegations of offences punishable under Sections 498A/4of Indian Penal Code (IPC), inter alia, against the husband (first petitioner), his father (the s...
- ‹ Prev
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- Next ›
- Last »