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.
Vijay Kumar Sharma vs.united India Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 01, 2018 + W.P.(C) 11323/2015 VIJAY KUMAR SHARMA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. V. K. Garg, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Ms. Noopur Dubey & Ms. Shurti Munjal, Advs.1. Versus UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Senior Advocate with Mr. Dinesh Mathur, Mr. R. S. Mathur, Ms. Aparna Singh, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL)... Petitioner was Deputy Manager in Regional Office of respondent- Insurance Company in Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh), when he was departmentally proceeded against on the charge of wilful and gross negligence in disbursing the accident claims thereby causing financial loss of `56,061/-, `46,067/-, `51,500/-, `62,450/- and `85,419/- respectively.... Petitioner was also charged for wilfully approving inadmissible marine claim in a grossly negligent manner thereby causing financial loss of `4,27,612/-. The Inqui...
Shiv Kumar Through: Gurnam Singh Kochhar vs.land Acquisition Colllecto ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgement:1. t February, 2018 + W.P.(C) 9912/2017 SHIV KUMAR THROUGH: GURNAM SINGH KOCHHAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Saroj Kumar Singh and Mr. Gurnam Singh Kochar, Advocates. Versus LAND ACQUISITION COLLLECTOR & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel for LAC/L&B with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate. Mr. Sushil Kumar Pandey, Mr. Vijay Joshi and Ms. Neha Sharma, Advocates for UOI. 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 Constitution of India filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to land of the petitioners measuring 450 Sq. yards comprised in Khasra No.140/2, situated in the revenue estate of village Dhichaun Kalan, Delhi (hereinafter referred as the 'Subject Land') stand lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency...
M/S Comex Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Vs.m/s Bhushan Dealmark Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~02 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CO.APP. 1/2018 M/S COMEX INFRATECH PVT. LTD. Date of decision:1. t February, 2018 Through Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate. ..... Appellant versus ..... Respondent Through M/S BHUSHAN DEALMARK PVT. LTD. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) Appellant-M/s. Comex Infratech Pvt. Ltd., impugns order dated 24th May, 2017 passed by the Company Judge in Company Petition No.55/2014 and C.A. No.1982/2014, preferred by the respondent before us, M/s. Bhusan Dealmark Pvt. Ltd.2. The impugned order admits the company petition and appoints the Official Liquidator attached to this Court as Provisional Liquidator with a direction to prepare complete inventory of all assets, and take over the assets, books of accounts, records etc. Premises are to be sealed.3. Directions have been issued for furnishing details regarding names and addresses of the Directors, location of the books of accounts, movea...
Orient 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. 96/2017 & CM Nos. 8129-30/2017 ORIENT 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 under section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act for property being No.1641, Shyama Prasad, Mukherjee Marg, Delhi-110006. The rent paid by the petitioner is stated to be Rs.131.79 per month. The respondents are joint owners of the property. It is urged that the respondent No.2 is a hotelier and is running a hotel un...
Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. & Anr. Vs.www.indiabulls.org & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 590/2017 & I.A.A102402017 INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LTD. & ANR. ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Bitika Sharma with Ms. Isha Tyagi, Advocates versus WWW.INDIABULLS.ORG & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Dr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, Advocate for D-3 Date of Decision:01. t February, 2018 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. As defendant nos. 1 and 2 do not appear despite service, they are proceeded ex-parte.2. Vide order dated 22nd January, 2018, the suit was decreed against defendant no.3.3. At this stage, learned counsel for the plaintiffs gives up prayers (b), (c), (d) and (e) of the prayer clause to the suit. She further states that in view of the judgment of this Court in Satya Infrastructure Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Satya Infra & Estates Pvt. Ltd., 2013 SCC OnLine Del 508, the present suit be decreed qua the relief of injunction. The CS (COMM) 590/2017 Page 1 of 4 relevant portion of the said judgment relied upo...
Parveen Kumar vs.uoi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5374/2002 Pronounced on: February 01st, 2018 PARVEEN KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Parveen Kemz, Adv. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sidharth Khatana, Adv. for R-7, 9, 10, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21. Mr. L.R. Khatana, Adv. for R-1 to 6. Mr. Rajvinder Singh, Adv. for R-18. Mr. Ravi Shankar, Adv. for R-18. Mr. Raju Mandrik, Adv. for R-14. UOI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) DATE: February 01st, 2018 % 1. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the appointment, of... RESPONDENTS 7 to 21 as Assistant Directors in the Export Inspection Council of India (impleaded as Respondent No.2 herein). Consequently, the petition prays, essentially, that the appointments of the aforementioned... RESPONDENTS 7 to 21 be quashed. W.P.(C) 5374/2002 Page 1 of 20 2. The petitioner joined the Export Inspection Agency, stated to be a subordinate office under Respondent No.2, as a Junior Scientific Assistant on 01st De...
Som Dutt Tiwari vs.vinod Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:1. t February, 2018 + CM(M) 1249/2015 and CM APPL.31333/2015 (stay) SOM DUTT TIWARI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Jaykant Prasad, Advocate versus VINOD KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Advocate with Mr. Azharuddin Chaudhary, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The respondent herein concededly was not a party to the civil suit (Suit No.407/08) which was instituted by the petitioner herein on 02.06.2008 against one Pawan Kumar son of Ram Kumar, the prayer in that suit being for the decree in the nature of recovery of possession of premises described as bearing No.248, Block A, Pocket-II, Sector 8, Rohini, Delhi-110085, besides arrears of rent and mesne profits. The suit was decided by an ex parte judgment dated 24.01.2012 by the Civil Judge. It is undisputed now that the said decree has since been satisfied, possession having been taken over by the first respondent (decree holder...
Kishan Lal vs.state Govt. Of n.c.t. Of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~ * 12 + 13 + 14 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 89/2002 KISHAN LAL Through: Mr.Jayant K. Sud, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajay Verma, Ms. Vaishali Soni, Mr. Honey Khanna, and Ms. Sanya Sud, Advocates. ..... Appellant versus STATE GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI Through: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP ..... Respondent With CRL.A. 215/2002 KALU @ VIJAY PAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Jayant K. Sud, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajay Verma, Ms. Vaishali Soni, Mr. Honey Khanna, and Ms. Sanya Sud, Advocates. STATE versus Through: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP ..... Respondent CRL.A. 604/2003 RAJENDER @ RAJU @ GANJU ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sumeet Verma with Mr. Aman Crl A Nos. 89 and 215 of 2002 and 604 of 2003 page 1 of 14 Chaudhary, Advocates. versus CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP ..... Respondent JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA % JUDGMENT0102.2018 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. These three appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 25th January 200...
State (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi) vs.vikas @ Vicky
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :1. t February, 2018 + CRL. REV. PET. 89/2018 & Crl.M.A.Nos.1934/18, 19STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) Through : Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP ........ Petitioner versus VIKAS @ VICKY Through : None ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Present revision petition has been preferred by the State to challenge the legality and correctness of the order dated 30.10.2017 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in FIR No.105/2017, registered at Police Station Preet Vihar, whereby the respondent Vikas @ Vicky was discharged for the commission of offence.2. I have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and have examined the file. This Court finds no illegality or material irregularity in the impugned order to intervene. The prosecutrix was aged 17 years at the time of occurrence. It has come on record in the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C as well as under Section 164 Cr.P.C that the prose...
Delhi State & District Consumer Courts Practitioner Welfare Associatio ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2018
$~6 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 11424/2016 & CM No.44784/2016 % Date of decision :1. t February, 2018 DELHI STATE & DISTRICT CONSUMER COURTS PRACTITIONER WELFARE ASSOCIATION (REGD.)........ Petitioner Through : Mr. Ajay Kumar Porwal, Adv. versus LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR & ORS Through : Ms. Sakshi Popli and ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advs. for R- GNCTD CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE1 This writ petition, couched as a public interest litigation, relates to the exercise of jurisdiction by the District Consumer Fora constituted under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.2. The petitioner has placed reliance on the order dated 31st October, 2007 passed by the State Commission, Delhi in Revision Petition No.Singhs Dental Hospital v. Amrit Lal Dureja. In this case, a preliminary objection regarding the territorial jurisdiction of the District Forum (South-W...