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.
Sumer Misri vs.nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + SUMER MISRI CRL.M.C.2973/2014 Judgment delivered on:05. 02.2018 ........ Petitioner NCT OF DELHI & ORS. Versus ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : Mr Neeraj Sharma with Mr Sanpreet Singh Ajmani Respondent in person. Mr Akshai Malik, Addl. PP for the State SI Sanjeev Kumar, EOW, New Delhi. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT0502.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) CRL.M.C.2973/2014 & CRL.M.A.10303/2014(stay) 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 05.02.2014, whereby the petitioner has been summoned in a case filed under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) alleging commission of offence under Sections 420 & 406 IPC.2. The respondent complainant is a 50% shareholder in a Company M/s. DSM Healthcare Private Limited (hereinafter BAIL APPLN.2973/2014 Page 1 of 12 referred to as the Company), of which the petitioner was the Managing...
M/S Delhi Transport Corporation vs.surendra Pal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
$~9. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6691/2017 and CM APPL. 27870/2017 1. M/S DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Through: Mr. Vibhor Mathur and Mr. Salil Srivastava, Advocates. ........ Petitioner versus SURENDRA PAL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate with Ms. Deboshree Mukherjee, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI % The petitioner/DTC is aggrieved by the order dated 08.11.2016, ORDER0502.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.3348/2014 filed by the respondent working on the post of a Driver in the DTC praying inter alia for quashing and setting aside the order dated 22.05.2014 whereunder, his plea for reinstatement in service stood rejected.2. By the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the O.A. filed by the respondent and quashed and set aside the order dated 22.05.2014 passed by the petitioner/DTC with directions to reinstate him w.e.f. 01.08.2013 with notional benefit of seniority ...
Inderbir Singh vs.north Delhi Municipal Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
$~48 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:05. h February, 2018 + W.P.(C) 10637/2016 INDERBIR SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. B.L. Wali, Advocate. versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Mini Pushkarna, Standing Counsel for NDMC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. By this petition, petitioner seeks following reliefs : (i) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent to immediately issue LOIs/Offer letters to the petitioner in respect of parking sites at (i) Karampura Commercial Complex, (ii) in front of Milan Cinema and MCD Shops, (iii) Covered Drain, Ramesh Nagar and (iv) Parking site near Manglam Plaza, Rohini, Plot No.7 (Vardhaman Plaza) being at serial Nos.7, 8, 9 and 17 of NIT Parking List issued by the respondent for W.P. (C) No.10637/2016 Page 1 of 5 allotment of ...
Suman Goel & Anr. Vs.sanjeev Kumar Jain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.98/2018 + % SUMAN GOEL & ANR. Reserved on:31. t January, 2018 Pronounced on:5. h February, 2018 ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Sanjay Padam Jain, Adv. with versus Mr. Vinay Kumar Bhasin, Adv. SANJEEV KUMAR JAIN CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA ..... Respondent To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J C.M. No.3752/2018 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. C.M.Nos.3755/2018 (for condonation of delay 3754/2018 (for condonation of delay in re-filing) in filing) & 2. For the reasons stated in the applications, delay of 215 days in filing and 10 days in re-filing the appeal are condoned. C.M. stands disposed of. RFA No.98/2018 and C.M. No.3753/2018(stay) 3. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendants in the suit RFA No.98/2018 Page 1 of 9 impugning the judgment of the Trial Court dated 10.1.2017 by which t...
Phool Singh vs.sultan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % PHOOL SINGH SULTAN RFA No.113/2018 5th February, 2018 ..... Appellant Mr. D.S.Patial, Advocate. Through: versus Through: ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No.4433/2018(Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. CM No.4434/2018(Delay in re-filing) For the reasons stated in the application, delay in re-filing is condoned. CM stands disposed of. RFA No.113/2018 & CM No.4432/2018 (stay) 1. This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) by the defendant in the suit RFA No.113/2018 Page 1 of 12 impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 30.3.2017 by which the trial court has decreed the suit for possession in favour of the respondent/plaintiff and against the appellant/defendant with respect to the suit property admeasuring 62 sq. yds situated in Khasra No.230, in t...
Anjali Gupta vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 4757/2017 Judgment delivered on:05. 02.2018 ANJALI GUPTA versus STATE Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Mr. Aseem Mehrotra, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Arun Kumar Sharma, APP for State. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT0502.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) CRL.M.C. 4757/2017 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by judgment dated 23.08.2017 of the Revisional Court, whereby, the Revisional Court allowed the Revision Petition filed by the petitioner and permitted de-freezing of the saving account of the petitioner, subject to the petitioner furnishing a Fixed Deposit Receipt in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in the name of the Trial Court.2. The Revision Petition was filed by the petitioner against order CRL.M.C. 4757/2017 Page 1 of 3 dated 12.05.2017 of the Trial Court, whereby, the Trial Court had declined to defreeze the saving account of the petitione...
Suresh Chand and Anr vs.management of Ramjas College and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 05, 2018 + W.P.(C) 5102/2017 1. SURESH CHAND AND ANR Through: Mr. Vikas Nagpal, Advocate. ........ Petitioners Versus MANAGEMENT OF RAMJAS COLLEGE AND ANR. Through: Mr. Arurag Mathur, Advocate for ........ RESPONDENTS Respondent No.1. Mr. Santosh Kumar, Mr.Abhinav Sharma, Advocates for Respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Vide office orders of 23rd December, 2011 and 30th December, 2011 (Annexure-P5 colly), petitioners, who were working as Lab Assistant and Office Assistant were suspended on account of criminal cases being registered against them. Quashing of the aforesaid orders is sought in this petition on the ground that the petitioners trial in the criminal cases has not begun and no departmental inquiry is pending against the petitioners. W.P.(C) 5102/2017 Page 1 of 4 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the first petitioner is going to retire within two months and...
Rajeev Chhabra vs.surinder Khurana & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h February, 2018. CS(OS) 120/2017 & IAs No.3101/2017 & 3676/2017 (both u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) RAJEEV CHHABRA ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Adv. with plaintiff-in-person. Versus SURINDER KHURANA & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Joginder Sukhija and Mr. Amitesh Giroti, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The plaintiff Rajeev Chhabra has instituted this suit against the three defendants namely (i) Surinder Khurana; (ii) Anjana Khurana; and, (iii) Arun Khurana, for (a) partition of property No.A-1/261, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi; (b) for possession with respect to 50% share in the ground floor, 50% share in the first floor of the said property; and, (c) for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dealing with the property.2. 3. The suit was entertained, though no ex-parte relief sought, granted. Pleadings have been completed and the suit is ripe for framing of issues and for conside...
Baba Balbir Singh vs.delhi Development Authourity
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA No.96/2018 & CM Nos. 3433/2018(stay) 3434/2018 (exemption) % BABA BALBIR SINGH Reserved on:29. h January, 2018 Pronounced on:5. h February, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ved Prakash Sharma, Advocate with Ms. Amrit Kaur Oberoi, Advocate, Ms. Abha Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Siddharth Bhardwaj, Advocate. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHOURITY Through: Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Advocate. ..... Respondent 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 plaintiff in the suit impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 11.10.2017 by which the trial court has dismissed the suit for possession and injunction filed by the appellant/plaintiff. The suit property comprises of 1 Bigha and 2 Biswas of land (1,100 sq. yards) out of Khasra Nos. 1089/1032/445 RFA No.96/2018 Page 1 of 18 and 444 and 1031...
Ashwani @ Chinni vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:5. h February, 2018 CRL.A. 1210/2016 ASHWANI @ CHINNI ..... Appellant STATE Represented by: Mr. Dhan Mohan, Ms. Tanu B. Mishra, Mr. Ravi Mishra, Ms. Harkamal Jeet Kaur and Ms. Manisha Saharan, Advocates. versus Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP for State with SI Karamvir, PS Narela. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. By the present appeal, the appellant challenges the impugned judgment dated 5th November, 2016 convicting him for the offence punishable under Sections 3IPC and the order on sentence dated 8th November, 2016 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six years and to pay a fine of 2,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Sections 3IPC.2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the dispute was between the complainant and co-accused Dinesh and D...
- ‹ Prev
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- Next ›
- Last »