Delhi Court February 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.
Rashtriya Rajdhani Kshetra Tipahiya Chalak Union Delhi vs.commissioner ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-2018
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:26. h February, 2018 + W.P.(C) 5902/2017 RASHTRIYA RAJDHANI KSHETRA TIPAHIYA CHALAK UNION DELHI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar with Ms. Shashi Kiran, Advs. versus COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORT & ORS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Satyakam, ASC with Mr. Shashwat Parihar, Adv. for GNCTD. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, (ACTING CHEIF JUSTICE) 1. This writ petition complains that a large number of private buses as well as taxis, registered in Uttar Pradesh, enter into Delhi through different entry points, run on several routes of Delhi, carrying passengers as well as picking up passengers from point to point basis without having proper permission and permit from the Govt. of NCT of Delhi.2. The writ petition submits that these vehicles also do not follow the permit conditions of the registration and disobey the rules and traffic regulations as ...
R P Bali & Anr vs.state (Govt of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-2018
$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :26. h FEBRUARY, 2018 CRL.REV.P. 154/2018 R P BALI & ANR Through : Mr.B.P.Sharma, Advocate. ........ Petitioners versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) Through : Mr.Tarang Srivastava, APP. SI Pankaj, PS Kirti Nagar. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG + S.P.GARG, J.(Oral) CRL.M.A.No.3695/2018 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. CRL.M.A.No.3696/2018 (Delay) 1. For the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay in refiling the petition, the delay is condoned.2. The application for condonation of delay is disposed of. CRL.REV.P. 154/2018 & CRL.M.A.No.3694/2018 1. Present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated Crl.P.Rev. 154/2018 Page 1 of 3 22.05.2017 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge by which application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall certain witnesses ...
Anurodh Singh Pal vs.himanshu & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-2018
$~17 * % + MAC.APP. 880/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:26. h February, 2018 ANURODH SINGH PAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Satyam Sisodia and Mr. Manish Awasthi, Advs. versus HIMANSHU & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. A.K. Rajgopal, Adv. for R1. Mr. A.K. Soni, Adv. for R2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal whereby his claim petition for compensation has been dismissed.2. On 21st December, 2013, the appellant was going in an EECO van. The appellant started vomiting in the van, when they reached IFFCO Chowk Flyover, whereupon the driver of the EECO van stopped the vehicle and parked the van on the side of the flyover by switching on the lights, when suddenly the offending vehicle No.DL-3CB-R-1946 came from behind and hit the EECO van which resulted in death of two persons and others suffered injuries. The appellant and his associate, Narender filed two separate claim ...
M/S. Ambience Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Vs.dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order reserved on :08th February, 2018 Order pronounced on :26th February, 2018 + CRL. REV. P. 16/2015 M/S. AMBIENCE HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. K. R. Manjani, Advocate. versus DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.Crl. M. A. No.1423/2018 (Recalling of order dated 23.11.2017) By way of the present application, the petitioner seeks recalling/rectification of order dated 23. 11.2017 of this Court, on the ground that few clerical mistakes as detailed in para 3 of the application (running into 7 pages) have occurred which have bearing on the decision of this Court. Arguments have been heard. Written submissions (undated) filed by the petitioner have also been perused. During the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that final arguments were heard on 15.11.2017 and therefore, the order wa...
Gagandeep Singh and Anr vs.union of India & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-2018
$~49 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:26. 02.2018 + W.P.(C) 1808/2018 & CM Nos.7417-7418/2018 GAGANDEEP SINGH AND ANR ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Chinmoy Pradip Sharma and Mr. Sayan Ray, Advocates. UNION OF INDIA & ANR versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. P.S. Singh and Ms. Annu Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) CM No.7418/2018 (exemption) 1. Allowed subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) 1808/2018 & CM No.7417/2018 2. Issue notice. Mr. P.S. Singh accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.3. Learned counsel for the petitioners says that the issue which arises in the present writ petition is similar to the issue which arose in an order rendered on 21.12.2018, passed by another Single Judge of this court in WP(C) No.11307/2017, titled: Raman Nanda vs. Union of India & Ors.4. Counsel for the petitioners says that petitioners wish to take the benefit of the directives contained in the said order.5. C...
Union of India. Vs.manjit Singh Bali
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-2018
$~47 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:26. 2.2018 + W.P.(C) 1803/2018 & CM No.7410/2018 UNION OF INDIA. ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. R.V. Sinha and versus Mr. A.S. Singh, Advs. MANJIT SINGH BALI Through : None. ..... Respondent CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER % RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) 1. Mr. Sinha, who appears for the petitioner, assails the order of the Central Information Commission (in short "CIC") to the extent that the Department of Post (in short "DOP") has been directed to furnish to the respondent, copies of the file notings/correspondence relating to sanction accorded qua his prosecution.2. Mr. Sinha says that insofar as the order according sanction for prosecution is concerned, the same was already furnished to the respondent.3. A perusal of the order passed by the CPIO would show that the defence taken by the petitioner to deny access to the documents, information and/ or correspondence with the CBI was that it would impede the prosecution...
Rajesh vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RESERVED ON : OCTOBER28 2017 DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY242018 CRL.A.373/2017 ..... Appellant Through : Ms.Aishwarya Rao, Advocate. versus ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP RAJESH STATE CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR S.P GARG, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is a judgment dated 4.2.2017 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.arising out of FIR No.228/2011 registered at Police Station New Usmanpur by which the appellant-Rajesh was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 302 and 397 IPC read with Section 392 IPC. By an order dated 08.02.2017, the accused was sentenced to undergo Imprisonment for life with fine `5,000/- under Section 302 IPC and Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with fine `5,000/- under SectionIPC. The sentences were to operate concurrently. Crl.A.373/2017 Page 1 of 18 2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution, as reflected in the c...
Narendra Yadav vs.indian Oil Corporation Ltd. And Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2018
$~34 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order : February 23, 2018 W.P.(C) 1750/2018 & CM No.7245/2018 NARENDRA YADAV ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Barun Kumar Sinha and Ms.Pratibha Sinha, Advocates INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Nikhil Mundeta, Advocate versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) 1. Impugned order of 10th January, 2018 (Annexure P-1) rejects petitioners Representation of 29th November, 2017 (Annexure P-2) wherein specific plea taken is that the documents as referred to in paragraph No.2 of the Representation do not form part of the charge sheet and are not included in the list of documents.2. Impugned order notes that though these documents have not been mentioned in Annexure III of the charge sheet, but it is clearly stated in the said Annexure that any other document(s) considered necessary during the course of departmental inquiry proceedings can be duly presented by the prosecution.3. The inq...
Raju Kumar and Ors vs.union of India & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~19 * + W.P.(C) 1717/2018 with CM Nos.7137-7139/2018 RAJU KUMAR AND ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Gaurav Gupta & Mr.Jaspal Singh, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Akshay Makhija, CGSC with Ms.Mahima Bahl, Advocate CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI ORDER2302.2018 The petitioners are aggrieved by the common order dated % 1. 16.02.2018, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, on the interim application filed by them in O.A. No.3526/2017 and one filed by another set of applicants in O.A. No.749/2018.2. We may note at the outset that the petitioners have filed the captioned O.A. against the respondent No.1/Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance & Pension and the respondent No.2/Staff Selection Commission, praying inter alia for issuing directions to them to adopt neutralization/equalization/ moderation process in respect of all the four Tiers/stages of the Combined G...
Sanjay Kalra & Anr vs.registrar of Companies, Nct of Delhi & Haryana a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2018
$~61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:23. 2.2018 + W.P.(C) 1742/2018 SANJAY KALRA & ANR ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Himanshu Harbola with Mr. Ketan Madan, Advocates. versus REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, NCT OF DELHI & HARYANA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Bhagwan Swarup Shukla, CGSC. CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) 1. Issue notice. Mr. Shukla who appears for the respondents accepts notice on behalf of respondents.2. According to counsel for the petitioners, the issue which arises in the present petition is covered by the judgment of another Single Judge of this Court dated 21.12.2017, passed in W.P.(C)11381/2017 titled: Sandeep Singh & Anr. vs. Registrar of Companies & Ors. W.P. (C) 1742/2018 Page 1 of 4 2.1 Therefore to my mind, no counter affidavit is required as the stand of the respondents is no different than that which obtained in Sandeep Singh & Anr (supra). Furthermore, I am told that directives conta...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »