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.
Surender @ Dheeraj vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
$~6-15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 1310/2014 SURENDER @ DHEERAJ ..... Appellant Decided on:27. h February, 2018 STATE versus Through: Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate. Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1327/2014 SUBRAMANYAN RAJA ..... Appellant STATE versus Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Advocate. Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1340/2014 AMIT @ BUNTY ..... Appellant STATE NEERAJ STATE Through: Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocate Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent versus CRL.A. 1366/2014 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate. Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent versus + + + Crl A1310of 2014 and batchmatters Page 1 of 55 + + + + + CRL.A. 1432/2014 SHRIKANT @ APPU ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Bharat Sharma with Ms.Sonika, Advocates. STATE versus Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1437/2014 RAJENDER PRASAD @ SHALU ..... ...
Krishnamurthy @ Vicky vs.state (Govt. Of Nct)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
$~6-15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 1310/2014 SURENDER @ DHEERAJ ..... Appellant Decided on:27. h February, 2018 STATE versus Through: Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate. Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1327/2014 SUBRAMANYAN RAJA ..... Appellant STATE versus Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Advocate. Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1340/2014 AMIT @ BUNTY ..... Appellant STATE NEERAJ STATE Through: Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocate Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent versus CRL.A. 1366/2014 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate. Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent versus + + + Crl A1310of 2014 and batchmatters Page 1 of 55 + + + + + CRL.A. 1432/2014 SHRIKANT @ APPU ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Bharat Sharma with Ms.Sonika, Advocates. STATE versus Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1437/2014 RAJENDER PRASAD @ SHALU ..... ...
Jitender Singh Bhandari & Anr vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1875/2018 JITENDER SINGH BHANDARI & ANR ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Anju Gupta and Mr. Roshan Lal Goel, Advocates for UOI/R-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % ORDER2702.2018 1 Vide impugned office order dated 7th April, 2017 (Annexure P-1), the first petitioner, who was Staff Car Driver on contractual basis, stands relieved upon expiry of his contractual tenure. 2 Overdue allowances to the tune of `50,000/- qua the first petitioner and `80,000/- qua the second petitioner are also sought and prayer is also made in this petition that directions be issued to the second respondent to expedite the selection process of staff car driver which is pending for almost five years. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have rendered satisfactory continuous service of more than three years but their services have been a...
Ajit Kumar @ Ajit Kumar Chaudhary and Ors vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
$~62 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgement:27. h February, 2018 + W.P.(C) 1934/2017 AJIT KUMAR @ AJIT KUMAR CHAUDHARY & ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Rajeev Verma, Adv. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with for Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate Ms. L&B/LAC. Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv. for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J (ORAL) 1. With the consent of the parties, the present writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal.2. This is a petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India filed by the petitioners seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to land bearing Khasra No.'s 189(5-10), 191(3-1), 214/1(1-12) and 214/2(3-4), measuring 12 Bighas 27 Biswas, situated in the revenue estate of village Molar Band, Tehsil Kalkaji, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as the 'subject land') stand lapsed in view of ...
Santosh Malik vs.state (Govt. Of Nct) & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A.1008/2017 Reserved on:17. h January, 2018 Decided on:27. h February, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate. SANTOSH MALIK $~ * + versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) & ORS. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for State/R-1 along with SI Karan Singh, P.S. Crime Branch. Mr. Vishal Raj Sehjipal, Mr. Anwar A. Khan, Mr. Sunil Sagar, Mr. Ghufran Ahmad, Advocates for R-2 to 5. JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. The Appellant, who is the mother of the deceased, has filed the present appeal being aggrieved by the judgment dated 22nd March, 2016 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) 04 (North), Rohini Courts, Delhi in Sessions Case No.arising out of FIR No.registered at Police Station (PS) Crime Branch (Bawana), acquitting Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 of the offences under Section 3Indian Penal Code (IPC). Crl.A.1008/2017 Page 1 of 33 2. Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 were charged with co...
m.c. Luthra vs.ashok Kumar Khanna
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % M.C. LUTHRA RFA No.780/2017 Reserved on:20. h February, 2018 Pronounced on:27. h February, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajesh Gogna, Advocate with appellant in person. ASHOK KUMAR KHANNA versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sakal Bhushan and Mr. Akash Jandial, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J1 This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant in the suit impugning the judgment of the Trial Court dated 9.6.2017 by which trial court has decreed the suit for recovery of Rs.18 lacs filed by the respondent/plaintiff for an amount of Rs.9 lacs with interest at 12% per annum pendente lite and future. The counter-claim of the appellant/defendant to forfeit the amount of Rs.9 lacs was dismissed RFA No.780/2017 Page 1 of 43 by the impugned judgment. The amount decreed of Rs. 9 lacs is the amount which ...
Neeraj vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
$~6-15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 1310/2014 SURENDER @ DHEERAJ ..... Appellant Decided on:27. h February, 2018 STATE versus Through: Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate. Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1327/2014 SUBRAMANYAN RAJA ..... Appellant STATE versus Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Advocate. Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1340/2014 AMIT @ BUNTY ..... Appellant STATE NEERAJ STATE Through: Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocate Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent versus CRL.A. 1366/2014 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate. Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent versus + + + Crl A1310of 2014 and batchmatters Page 1 of 55 + + + + + CRL.A. 1432/2014 SHRIKANT @ APPU ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Bharat Sharma with Ms.Sonika, Advocates. STATE versus Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1437/2014 RAJENDER PRASAD @ SHALU ..... ...
Vijay Kumar Agarwal vs.the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:27. 02.2018 CRL.M.C. 1311/2014 VIJAY KUMAR AGARWAL versus THE STATE Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS : :... Petitioner in person. Ms. Anita Abraham, Addl. PP for the State CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2702.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 07.10.2013 whereby the Revisional Court has dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner impugning order dated 11.12.2012 of the trial court rejecting the application under Section 207 of the Cr. P.C. as well as framing charges against the petitioner under Section 448/457/380/341 IPC.2. The petitioner who appears in person submits that the petitioner by his revision petition had challenged the order of the trial court on two counts; one non supply of English translation of the chargesheet and second CRL.M.C. 1311/2...
Vatan vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
$~6. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9429/2016 1. VATAN Through: Dr. Sumant Bhardwaj and Mr. Sagar Roy, Advocates. ........ Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Anil Panwar, CGSC with Mr. G.L. Bhatia, Advocate for R1. Mr. Santosh Kr. Tripathi, ASC with Mr.Shashank Tiwari and Mr. Parth Vasisth, Advocates for R2. Mr. V.S.R. Krishna, Advocate for DMRC. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI % ORDER2702.2018 The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 23.05.2016, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissing his original application assailing a letter dated 07.09.2011, issued by the respondent No.3/DMRC informing him that he could not lay a claim to his candidature for the post of a Customer Relation Assistant (in short CRA) after the validity of the panel drawn for the said post, had lapsed.2. By the impugned order dated 23.05.2016, the Tribunal dismissed the original application filed...
Orcus Capital Advisors Pvt. Ltd vs.ajay Chandra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:27. h February, 2018. CS(COMM) 783/2017 & IAs No.13341/2017 (u/O II R-2 CPC), 13342/2017 (for exemption), 14988/2017 (u/O XXXVII R-3 CPC) & 1361/2017 (u/O XXXVII R-3(5) CPC) ORCUS CAPITAL ADVISORS PVT. LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Rajat Navet and Mr. Kushagra Pandit, Advs. AJAY CHANDRA Versus ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Saket Sikri and Ms. K. Gayatri, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The plaintiff has instituted this suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for recovery of Rs.3,65,13,000/- along with pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum.2. The suit was entertained and summons for appearance and on the defendant entering appearance, summons for judgment were served on the defendant and leave to defend application being IA No.1361/2018 has been filed by the defendant and to which the counsel for the plaintiff on 30th January, 2018 stated that no reply was requir...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »