Delhi Court November 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 Renaissance Buildcon Co. Pvt Ltd & Ors vs.m/s s.e. Investments Ltd ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2018
$~1 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO(OS) (COMM) 253/2018 & CM APPL.Nos.46198- 46201/2018 Decided on:19. 11.2018 M/S RENAISSANCE BUILDCON CO. PVT LTD & ORS ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Sachin Chopra, Mr. Gaurav Rana & Ms. Aastha Dhawan, Advocates. versus M/S S.E. INVESTMENTS LTD & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. P. Nagesh, Advocate for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) In this appeal under Section 37(1)(C) of the Arbitration & % 1. Conciliation Act, 1995 [hereafter referred to as Act]., the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 2nd February, 2018, rejecting the petition under Section 34 of the Act is impugned.2. The brief facts are that the appellant No.1 [hereafter referred as Renaissance]. had entered into a Shareholders Agreement, sometime in May, 2007 with D.B. Zwirn Mauritius Trading No.2 Limited [hereafter FAO(OS) (COMM) 253/2018 Page 1 of 6 referred to as ...
Azad vs.the State Govt. Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2018
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + BAIL APPLN. 773/2018 AZAD Judgment delivered on:19.11.2018 ........ Petitioner versus THE STATE GOVT.NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent : Mr. Faheem Alam, Advocate. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State. SI Anil Rathod, PS Neb Sarai. : JUDGMENT1911.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.41/2018 under Sections 3IPC, Police Station Neb Sarai.2. The allegations against the petitioner are that the complainant along with his friend Sharif were walking towards his house when he saw that the petitioner along with Arif and Sahil were beating a boy named Farookh. When the complainant and his friend Sharif intervened, two more boys named Talib and Nadim came with rods and started beating them and soon thereafter further two more boys named Aman and Rohit came with stick and assaulted all o...
Bhupinder Pal Singh vs.k.c.gehani & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:19.11.2018 + W.P.(C) 2787/1983 & C.M. Nos. 16133/2013 & 16134/2013 BHUPINDER PAL SINGH ........ Petitioner Versus ........ RESPONDENTS K.C.GEHANI & ORS. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU : Mr S. S. Ahluwalia and Mr Jatin Teotia, Advocates, DHCLSC. : Ms Monika Arora, CGSC with Mr Harsh Ahuja and Mr Kushal Kumar, Advocates for UOI. VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the orders dated 30.06.1983, 13.09.1982 and 15.04.1982 passed by Deputy Secretary to Government of India, Department of Rehabilitation and Settlement Commissioner (Judl.) under Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (hereafter the Act). The said orders are, hereinafter, referred to as the impugned orders.2. By an order dated 30.03.1981, the Managing Officer had accepted the petitioners contention tha...
Delhi Development Authortiy vs.ram Prakash Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:19. h November, 2018 + CM(M) 1179/2018 & CM APPL. 40270/2018 % 1. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORTIY ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Naveen Kumar Raheja, Adv. versus RAM PRAKASH GUPTA ..... Respondent Through: Mr.H.K. Nahata, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) On 16th March, 1981, the respondent-plaintiff applied for allotment of plot under the Rohini Residential Scheme. At the time of applying, he had declared his name as Ram Ashrey Dayal. Thereafter, he changed his name to Ram Prakash Gupta purportedly without informing the petitioner (the DDA).2. On 5th January, 2004, a draw of lots took place, in which the respondent-plaintiff was allotted MIG Plot No.545, in Pocket 4, Block No.C, Sector 28, Rohini Phase IV. A demand letter was issued, to the respondent-plaintiff, dated 19-27th January, 2004, requiring him to deposit 3,71,520/-.3. On 15th March, 2010, the DDA wrote to the respondent- CM(M) 1179/20...
Sharanjit Kaur Kohli vs.ramandeep Singh Kohli
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgement:19. h November, 2018 $~3 * % + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 92/2018 SHARANJIT KAUR KOHLI ..... Appellant Through Mr. Shubham Bhalla and Ms. Roopam Rai, Advocates versus RAMANDEEP SINGH KOHLI CORAM: Through Ms. Chandrani Prasad, Advocate ..... Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 20.02.2018 passed by the learned Family Court whereby an application filed by the appellant/wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as HMA) was allowed. The Family Court has awarded maintenance in the sum of Rs.20,000/- per month alongwith litigation expenses of Rs. 11,000/- with effect from the date she vacates the rented accommodation occupied by the parties before their separation.2. The necessary facts to be noticed for the disposal of the present appeal are that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 28.03.20...
R. Shekhar @ Gunnu vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2018
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + BAIL APPLN. 2222/2018 Judgment delivered on:19.11.2018 R. SHEKHAR @ GUNNU STATE versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent : Mr. Prashant Mehta with Ms. Vasundhra Bhardwaj, Advocates. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State. SI Sandeep Kumar, PS Ambedkar Nagar. : JUDGMENT1911.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks interim bail for 30 days in FIR No.197/2017 under Sections 3IPC and Sections 25/27/Arms Act, Police Station Ambedkar Nagar on the ground of medical help required by the father of the petitioner, who has undergone a bypass surgery.2. Learned APP for the State, under instructions, submits that the bypass surgery happened in May 2018 and over 6 months have passed and father is on the road to recovery. He submits that as per the BAIL APPLN. 2222/2018 Page 1 of 2 inquiry, there is no urgent medical...
Pccare247 Solutions Pvt Ltd vs.pay Commerce India Private Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2018
1 $~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 488/2016 PCCARE247 SOLUTIONS PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Ashish Agarwal, Advocate with Ms. Shruti Gupta, Advocate. versus PAY COMMERCE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Defendant Through: None. Date of Decision:19. h November, 2018 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) JUDGMENT1 Present suit has been filed for recovery of Rs.1,14,96,715/- along with pendente lite and future interest at 18% per annum. The prayer clause in the present suit is reproduced hereinbelow:-"(a) pass a decree in favour of the Plaintiff and against the defendant for a sum of Rs. 1,14,96,715.00 (Rupees One Crore Fourteen Lac Ninety Six Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifteen only); (b) grant pendente lite future interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum to the Plaintiff and against the defendant; CS(COMM) 488/2016 Page 1 of 10 (c) (d) award costs of suit in favour of plaintiff and against defendant; pass any other order or such further ...
Rishi Promoters Private Ltd. & Anr. Vs.anju Arora (Nee Ms. Anju Bajaj) ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:19. h November, 2018 CS(OS) 1876/2008, IA No.5279/2018 & IA No.5477/2018 (both u/O XXII R-3 CPC) and IA No.9674/2018 (u/O XXII R-10 r/w O I R- 10, O VI R-17, O XXII R-9 CPC) RISHI PROMOTERS PRIVATE LTD. & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Dinesh Garg & Ms. Rachna Agrawal, Advs. Versus ANJU ARORA (NEE MS. ANJU BAJAJ) & ORS..... Defendants Through: Mr. Raman Duggal, Ms. Aayushi Gupta & Ms. Ojusya Joshi, Advs. for D-1. Mr. Gaurav Puri, Mr. Aditya Bali, Ms. Neha Bhutani & Ms. Tanya Chawla, Advs. for D-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 IAs No.5279/2018 and 5477/2018 of the defendant no.3 and defendant no.1 respectively, both under Order XXII Rule 3 CPC for dismissal of the suit as abated, and IA No.9674/2018 of the plaintiffs under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC read with Order I Rule 10, Order VI Rule 17 and Order XXII Rule 9 CPC are for consideration.2. The counsel for the defendant no.3 has argued that (i) the plaint...
Smt. Mamta Singh vs.state (Govt. Of Nct) of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2018
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + BAIL APPLN. 2070/2018 Judgment delivered on:19. 11.2018 SMT. MAMTA SINGH ........ Petitioner STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) OF DELHI versus ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : Mr. Alpana Pandey, Advocate. Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State with Insp.Ramesh Chandra, P.S.Dwarka. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1911.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.308/2016 under Sections 420/406/120B/174 IPC, Police Station Baba Haridas Nagar.2. The allegations against the petitioner are that the petitioner along with her husband was running a chit fund business and was collecting money from several individuals. Approximately 161 people of the locality are alleged to have paid money to the petitioner and her husband approximately amounting to Rs.3.95 crores.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a housewife ...
Ms. Neelam Devi vs.kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2018
$~11. * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision :19. 11.2018 % W.P.(C) 11675/2018 & C.M. No.45081/2018 MS. NEELAM DEVI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhruv Dwivedi, Ms. Ankita Khanna and Boony Mehra, Advocates versus KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN Through: Ms. Rashmi Bansal, Advocate ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 04.10.2018 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (the Tribunal) in O.A. No.3374/2018, whereby the tribunal has rejected the said O.A. preferred by the petitioner. W.P.(C) 11675/2018 Page 1 of 11 2. The respondent vide advertisement No.14 invited online application to fill up vacancies for the post of Principal, Vice Principal, PGT, TGT, Librarian and PRTs in the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS). The only mode for applying for the vacancies was through online ap...
- ‹ Prev
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- Next ›
- Last »