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.
Commercial Tyres vs.arjun Uppal & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~A- * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:01. 02.2018 + RC.REV. 98/2017 & CM Nos. 8141-42/2017 COMMERCIAL TYRES ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Bhagat Singh, Advocate versus ARJUN UPPAL & ANR. ..... Respondent Through Mr. B.B.Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nakul Sachdeva and Mr. Nikhil Singhvi, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. This revision petition is filed under section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the DRC Act) seeking to impugn the eviction order dated 22.08.2016 passed by the Additional Rent Controller (hereinafter referred to as the ARC).2. Respondent/landlord had filed an eviction petition against the petitioner/tenant for property being one shop measuring 15 x 9 being No.1641A, Shyama Prasad, Mukherjee Marg, Delhi-110006. The respondents are joint owners of the property in question and also of adjacent properties. Respondent No.2 is a hotelier and is running a hotel under the name and s...
Ms Ranju Sharma & Ors vs.the Directorate of Education & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 01, 2018 + W.P.(C) 3708/2016 1. MS RANJU SHARMA & ORS Through: Dr. M.Y. Khan, Advocate ........ Petitioners Versus THE DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Prabhasahay Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr.Atul Bandhu, Advocate for respondent No.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER ORAL... Petitioners are the teaching staff of respondent-School, who seek implementation of order of 29th October, 2013 (Annexure P-1), passed in W.P.(C) 6804/2013 Sangeeta Singh & Ors. Vs. Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors. Vide aforesaid order of 29th October, 2013 (Annexure P-1), it was directed that if any action is to be taken against the employees of respondent-School, including the teachers, then respondent-School shall take action in terms of Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973. Regarding payment of salary in terms of Sixth Central Pay Commission, it was directed that Circular of 11th February, 2009 is...
Azad Singh and Ors. Vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~16 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment :01. t February, 2018 + W.P.(C) 3644/2017 AZAD SINGH & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Bhagwant Prasad Gupta, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel for Jyoti Tyagi, LAC/L&B with Ms. Advocate. Ms. Beenashaw N. Soni, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G. S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land of the petitioner i.e. 10 Bigha and 5 Biswa comprised in Khasra 20 (4-12), 22 (3-17) and 3(1-16), situated in the revenue estate of Village Behlolpur, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Subject Land), has lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Ac...
Fci vs.m/s Kultar Singh and Brothers and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FCI OMP552015 Reserved on:3. d January, 2018 Date of decision:1. t February, 2018 Through: Mr.Rajeev Sharma, Adv. Petitioner Versus M/S KULTAR SINGH AND BROTHERS AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA1 This petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Impugned Arbitral Award dated 12.09.2014 passed by the Sole Arbitrator appointed by the Indian Council of Arbitration in Arbitration Case No.907/2010 titled Food Corporation of India v. M/s Kultar Singh & Brother and others.2. The disputes between the parties relate to the claim of damages by the petitioner under the Agreement for Storage-Cum-Milling of FCI Paddy Stored in Millers Permises into Conventional Raw/Parboiled Rice dated 21.02.1995 (hereinafter referred to as the said agreement). OMP No.55/2015 Page 1 3. In terms of the said agreement, the petitioner had supplied 18...
Dolby International Ab & Anr. Vs.das Telecom Private Limited & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) No.1426/2016 + % DOLBY INTERNATIONAL AB & ANR. 1st February, 2018 ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Chander M. Lall, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Saya Chaudhary Kapur, Mr. Vivek Ranjan, Mr. Nikhil Chawla, Mr. Devanshu Khanna, Mr. Ujjawal Sinha, Ms. Kanika Kanwar and Mr. Rupin Bahl, Advocates. versus DAS TELECOM PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Saikrishna Rajagopal, Ms. Julien George, Mr. Yatinder Garg and Mr. Yashpal Prasad, Advocates for D-2,3 and 4. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Counsel appearing for the defendants states that if any bank guarantee given by the defendants in favour of the plaintiffs has expired then such bank guarantee will be regularly renewed during the CS(COMM) No.1426/2016 Page 1 of 6 pendency of the suit, and any expired bank guarantee will be positively renewed within a period of two weeks from today. I.A.No.__/2018 (to be...
Northern Timbers & Ors. Vs.raj Kirpal Lumbers Ltd .
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.99/2018 % NORTHERN TIMBERS & ORS. 1st February, 2018 ..... Appellants Through: Ms. Shimpy Arman Sharma, versus Advocate. RAJ KIRPAL LUMBERS LTD . ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. No.3764/2018 (for exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. C.M. Appl. No.3765/2018 (for delay) 2. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 68 days in re-filing the appeal stands condoned. C.M. stands disposed of. RFA No.99/2018 3. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendants in the suit RFA No.99/2018 Page 1 of 9 impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 11.7.2017 by which the trial court has decreed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for Rs.5,00,000/- along with pendente lite interest at 10% and future interest at ...
Resham vs.devender k.yadav & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:29. 01.2018 Judgment delivered on:01. 02.2018 CRL.A. 99/2011 RESHAM ..... Appellant Through Ms.Inderjeet Sidhu, Adv. DHCLSC. versus DEVENDER K.YADAV & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Ms.Neelam Sharma, APP for the State along with SI Manmohan. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 This appeal has been preferred by the complainant against the judgment dated 23.11.2010 vide which the accused persons (respondent nos.1 and2) stood acquitted of the charges leveled against them. 2 Record shows that a complaint was made by the appellant (R) pursuant to which an FIR had been registered on 14.4.2008. The allegations in the complaint were that in the year 2005 and continuously thereafter the accused persons being members of the Yadav community intentionally insulted the complainant and her husband Ashok Kumar. The complainant and her husband being the members of the scheduled caste were subjected to CR...
Kuber Nath Srivastava vs.preet Pal Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:01. t February, 2018 + CM(M) 479/2017 KUBER NATH SRIVASTAVA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. N.K. Kantawala and Mr. Satyender, Advocates versus PREET PAL SINGH ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. There can be no denial of the fact that the petitioner (and his counsel) have been guilty of gross neglect. But, the question is should he suffer being non-suited for reasons which are shown to be attributable more to his counsel.2. The petitioner had instituted the suit (suit no.149/2006) on 30.03.2005 against the respondent seeking recovery of Rs.1,05,080/-. The suit was dismissed by the civil judge by judgment dated 04.11.2011. He filed regular civil appeal (RCA262013) with some delay. The said appeal was thrown out by the first appellate court as time barred by order dated 08.01.2014. The petitioner approached this court by invoking the revisional jurisdiction (CR...
Fazlur Rehman vs.the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
Judgment delivered on:01. 02.2018 $~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + FAZLUR REHMAN BAIL APPLN. 255/2018 CRL. M. A.1929/2018. ........ Petitioner versus THE STATE Advocates who appeared in this case: ..... Respondent For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : Mr K.K.Jha, Advocate with Mr Prabhakar Thakur Mr Akshai Malik, Addl. PP for the State with ASI Vijay Kumar, PS Sunder Vihar and Mr Vinod Kumar Sharma, CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT0102.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.488/2017 under Section 420 IPC, Police Station Mianwali Nagar.2. As per the subject FIR, one person with the name of Virendra Chaudhary was known to the complainant for approximately a year and a half prior to the registration of the FIR.3. It is contended that the said Virendra Chaudhary got familiar with BAIL APPLN.255/2018 Page 1 of 4 the family as he would bring gifts from his village, i.e. ghee and vegetables. It is al...
Subhash Chand Aggarwal (Deceased) Thr His Lrs vs.yashveer Singh & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:1. t February, 2018 RFA3542017 & CM Appl. No.13287/2017 SUBHASH CHAND AGGARWAL (DECEASED) THR HIS LRS ..... Appellants Through: Mr. B.K. Sood and Mr. Harish Gaur, Advocates versus YASHVEER SINGH & ANR Through: None ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT1 The appellants have challenged the judgment dated 30th January, 2017, whereby their suit for specific performance has been dismissed by the Trial Court. The appellants are the legal representatives of the plaintiff whereas the respondents were the defendants before the learned Trial Court. For the sake of convenience, the appellants and the respondents are referred to as per their ranks before the Trial Court as the plaintiff and the defendants respectively.2. On 29th May, 2004, the plaintiff entered into an agreement with the defendants to purchase an industrial plot in Khasra No.81/155, measuring 300 sq. yards (6 biswa) situated at village ...