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.
Sanjay Kumar vs.union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Through: SANJAY KUMAR $~19 * + W.P.(C) 1289/2018 CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI UNION OF INDIA & ANR. versus ........ Petitioner Ms.Shashi Kiran, Mr.Sujit Kumar Jha & Dr.Shatish Chandra, Advocates Through: Mr.Rajesh Kumar & Mr.Nikhil Kumar, Advocates with Mr.Devendra Singh, AC/CISF. ........ RESPONDENTS ORDER1202.2018 The petitioner herein was recruited as a Constable (Driver) in % 1. the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF). In a Departmental inquiry conducted against him for concealing the factum of his first marriage with Anjali on 09.12.2012 and entering into the second marriage with Meenu on 12.05.2013 during the life time of his first wife, he was found guilty of the charge levelled against him by the Department. Vide order dated 23.04.014, the Disciplinary Authority i.e. the Commandant, CISF, Unit FSTPP, Farakka had imposed a penalty of removal from service on the petitioner. W.P.(C) No.1289/2018 ...
State vs.wasim @ Sonu
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI STATE Decided on:12. h February, 2018 CRL.L.P. 23/2017 Represented by: Mr. Amit Gupta, APP for State ........ Petitioner with SI Rajender Singh, PS Malviya Nagar. versus WASIM @ SONU ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Khalil A. Ansari, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. By this petition State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 29th July, 2016 acquitting the respondent for offences punishable under SectionsIPC.2. FIR No.77/2015 under SectionsIPC was registered at PS Malviya Nagar, New Delhi on the statement of Mohd. Sahil (PW-2) who stated that he was studying in 10th standard and residing with his parents. On 13th January, 2015, at around 10.00 PM his father gave him a note of 1,000/- and asked him to bring articles from the shop. According to Mohd. Sahil, respondent who was residing in the neighbourhood on seeing the money in his hand tried to snatch the same. When he did not give the ...
Sumer Arora vs.manoj Kumar & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:16. h January, 2018 Pronounced on:09. h February, 2018 + O.M.P. 2/2018 & IA No.486/2018 SUMER ARORA ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. Rakesh Khanna, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Pavan Kr. Chaturvedi, Mr.A.B. Singh, Ms.Shefali Jain, Ms.Seema Rao and Mr.Bushee Kezum, Advocates. versus MANOJ KUMAR & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Mr.A.K. Singla, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Parmanand Yadav, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as the Act) for setting aside the arbitral award dated 12.08.2016.2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned award on the grounds as follows:-"a) the respondent on the basis of the frivolous arbitration award dated 12.08.2016, wherein petitioner had neither participated into the alleged arbitration proceedings nor was provided any opportunity or even served wit...
Suneel Kumar Tyagi vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~36 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 09, 2018 W.P.(C) 1217/2018 SUNEEL KUMAR TYAGI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Vishwendra Verma, Mr.K.G.Verma and Ms.Shivali, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms.Suparna Srivastava, CGSC with Mr.Tushar Mathur, Advocate for R-1, R- 2 and R-4 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR CM No.5048/2018 ORDER ORAL Allowed subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) No.1217/2018 & CM No.5047/2018 1. In this petition, mandamus is sought to respondents 1 and 3 to consider petitioner for appointment on the post of Assistant Hydrographic Surveyor.... Petitioner claims to be eligible and the only candidate who had applied in response to advertisement of 4th October, 2016. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the said post is still lying vacant and petitioner had made an e-mail representation (Annexure A-8) to W.P.(C) 1217/2018 Page 1 of 2 respondent Nos.1 to 3 on 4th November, 2017. It is submitte...
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited vs.sh. Satnam Singh and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~16 * + W.P.(C) 1199/2018 & CM Nos.4989-90/2018 MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LIMITED Through: Mr.Saket Sikri, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Pal Singh & Ms.Niyati Patwardhan, Advocates ........ Petitioner versus SH. SATNAM SINGH AND ANR. Through: None ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI ORDER0902.2018 The petitioner/MTNL is aggrieved by the judgment dated % 1. 17.08.2017 passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.2080/2016, filed by respondents No.1 and 2, ex-employees of the MTNL, who had retired on the post of Telecom Technical Assistant, on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2012 & 30.04.2013, after rendering 37 years and 38 years of service, respectively.2. The respondents had approached the Tribunal praying inter alia for quashing and setting aside orders dated 26.06.2013 and 19.10.2013 passed by the petitioner/MTNL seeking to effect recoveries from them for a sum of `1,76,252/-(qua the respondent No.1)...
Akhil vs.m/s Shri Ram General Insurance Co Ltd. & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~12 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:09. 02.2018 AKHIL FAO482018 Through: Mr. R.K. Nain, Advocate. ..... Appellant versus ........ RESPONDENTS M/S SHRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD & ORS Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(Oral) FAO482018 & CM Nos. 4811/2018, 4812/2018 & 4813/2018 1. The learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of the court that he may be permitted to delete the allegation of bias apropos the learned Commissioner in para 2 of the appeal. Accordingly, the first sentence of para 2 of the appeal shall be deemed to have been deleted.2. This appeal filed under section 30 of The Employees Compensation Act, 1923 impugns the order dated 03.01.2008 passed by the Ld. Commissioner, Employees Compensation Act, in case No.WC- I/05/WD/2017. FAO482018 Page 1 of 3 3. Brief facts according to the learned counsel for appellant/claimant are that the appellant was employed with R2 as a driver in vehicle bearing no HR-37C-580...
Sushila Giri vs.nitish Kaushik
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on :04. 12.2017 Date of Judgment:09. 02.2018 + SUSHILA GIRI R.F.A. 828/2015 ..... Appellant/Defendant. Through: Mr.Dinesh Kumar Gupta, Mr.Vidit Gupta and Ms. Harleen Singh, Advs. NITISH KAUSHIK. versus .. Respondent/Plaintiff. Through: Mr. Manish Sharma, Mr. Sanjeev Sharma and Mr. Sharad Arya, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL VINOD GOEL, J.1. Challenge in this Regular First Appeal is the impugned judgment and decree dated 01.09.2015 in Civil Suit No.459/2014 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge-02 (North-East), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (in short learned ADJ) by which the application of the appellant/defendant to grant him leave to defend under Order XXXVII Rule 3 (5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short CPC) was dismissed and consequently the suit of the respondent/plaintiff was decreed against the appellant/defendant R.F.A. 828/2015 Page 1 of 13 for recovery of Rs.7,00,000/- with...
Shivam Yadav vs.university of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision- 09.02.2018. + W.P.(C) 1207/2018 SHIVAM YADAV ........ Petitioner Through In-person. versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr.Prang with Ms.Slomita Rai and Mr.Mohinder J.S.Rupal, Advocates. Newmai CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI REKHA PALLI,J (ORAL) The... Petitioner, who is a student pursuing B.A (Hons.) Business 1. Economics from Aryabhatta College, Delhi University, being aggrieved by the notification dated 08.05.2017 issued by the Respondent-University introducing new guidelines governing the passing criteria for the Under-Graduate Courses under the Choice- Based Credit System, has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus for quashing the impugned notification dated 08.05.2017 with a direction to the Respondent/University to declare the result of the... Petitioner by applying the rules prevalent at the time of his admission in...
Om Prakash vs.subhash
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:9. h February, 2018 CRL.L.P. 552/2016 OM PRAKASH Represented by: Mr. Jitendra Kumar and Mr. Prashant K. Singh, Advocates ..... Appellant versus SUBHASH Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr. Prince Arora, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 24th June, 2016, whereby the learned Metropolitan Magistrate acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the petitioner/complainant has preferred the present leave petition.2. Briefly stated, case of the petitioner is that in the first week of December, 2010, respondent approached the petitioner, who are real brothers, to advance a friendly loan of 20 lakhs to Samar Bahadur Thakur, friend of respondent.... Petitioner gave 20 lakhs to Samar Bahadur from 3rd December, 2010 to 24th February, 2011. Samar Bahadur issued a cheque for this liability which was dishonored due t...
Manish Kumar Jain vs.akanksha Jain & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~17 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:09. 02.2018 CRL.REV.P. 295/2013 & CRL.M.A. 8002/2013 MANISH KUMAR JAIN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Prashant Mendiratta, Advocate and Ms. Malvika, Advocate. versus AKANKSHA JAIN & ANR. Through: Ms. Anu Narula, Advocate for R- l with Respondent No.1 in person. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J (Oral) 1. The learned counsel for the appellant states that the case was not heard by this Court substantively and since the Roster has changed, the matter stood released to be heard by the Roster Bench. The Court would however note, that the last order records: Arguments heard in part. List for further arguments on 07.02.2018. This petition seeks the setting aside of an order passed by the Family 2. Court, Judge-02, Saket, New Delhi on 08.04.2013, emanating from an ex- parte order dated 25.03.2010. Crl.Rev. P. 295 of 2013 Page 1 of 7 3. The petitioner and the respondent were mar...
- ‹ Prev
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- Next ›
- Last »