Delhi Court March 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.
Sita Rawat vs.south Delhi Municipal Council (Sdmc)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2018
$~3 * % + W.P.(C) 1293/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment :7. h March, 2018 SITA RAWAT ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Ramesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate. versus SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL (SDMC) .... Respondent Through: Mr. Tajinder Virdi, Advocate for SDMC. 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 and under the Street Vendors Act, 2014 filed by the petitioner. The petitioner claims to be a regular street vendor and vending at Site No.319, Prem Nagar Nallah, Subzi Market, New Delhi.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the fact that the rules of Delhi Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Rules 2017 have been notified on 10.01.2018, the petitioner would approach the Town Vending Committee (TVC) with the supporting documents. He seeks a direction that as and when the T...
Sanjit Chatterjee vs.alok K. Bagchi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:7. h March, 2018 CS(OS) No.96/2018 SANJIT CHATTERJEE ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Ginny J.Rautray, Ms. Anushka Ashok, Advs. ..... Defendant Versus ALOK K. BAGCHI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW IA31812018 (for exemption) Through: None.1. 2. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. The application is disposed of. CS(OS) 96/2018 & IA31802018 (u/O XXXIX R -1 & 2 CPC) 3. A]. The plaintiff has instituted the present suit: for permanent injunction to restrain the defendant from (i) constructing a lift blocking the plaintiffs balcony and compromising the privacy of the first floor of property No.J-1908, Chittaranjan Park, New Delhi; (ii) undertaking construction of additional floors thereby seeking to usurp the 33% right of the plaintiffs in the land underneath the property; (iii) constructing additional floors without ascertaining whether 44 year old building can bear additional construction; (iv) undertaking further co...
Mrs. Poonam Saxena vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2018
$~68 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:7. 3.2018 W.P.(C) 2052/2018, CM APPL.8457 & 8459/2018 MRS. POONAM SAXENA Through: Mr. Pulkit Deora, Adv. versus ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Adv. ..... Respondent UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. CORAM:-"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER % RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) 1. Issue notice. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, who appears for respondents, accepts notice. 1.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the issue which arises for consideration in this case is covered by the judgment of another Single Judge of this Court dated 21.12.2017, passed in W.P.(C)11381/2017 titled: Sandeep Singh & Anr. v. Registrar of Companies & Ors. This aspect is not disputed by the counsel for the respondents. Therefore, waiting for a counter affidavit would serve no purpose as the stand of the respondents is the same as in Sandeep Singh & Anr. (supra). W.P.(C) No.2052 of 2018 Pg. 1 of 3 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he w...
Sudeshena Das & Anr vs.rajender Kumar & Anr (Bharti Axa General Insura ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~16 * % + MAC.APP. 431/2017 and C.M. Appl. Nos.16943/2017 & 22221/2017 Date of Decision:07. h March, 2018 ..... Appellants SUDESHENA DAS & ANR Through: Mr. Sumant De, Mr. Samar Ali and Mr. Vivek Agarwal, Advocates versus RAJENDER KUMAR & ANR (BHARTI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD) ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Satyajit Kumar Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal whereby the compensation of Rs.3,62,500/- has been awarded to respondent No.1.2. The accident dated 21st June, 2014 resulted in grievous injuries to Rajender Kumar who suffered compound grade 3 fracture of left tibia and left fibula for which the steel rod was inserted in his left leg. Respondent No.1 suffered permanent disability of 23% with respect to left lower limb. Respondent No.1 is working as a Constable with Sashastra Seema Bal.3. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.4...
Sujata Prakash vs.state & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % SUJATA PRAKASH STATE & ORS. TEST. CASE No.28/2017 7th March, 2018 ........ Petitioner Mr. Neeraj Yadav, Advocate. Through: versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Aditi Sharma, Advocate for CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA R-2 and 3. To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This testamentary case has been filed by the petitioner for grant of letters of administration with the Will annexed of late Sh. Vishwa Prakash, husband of the petitioner, who passed away on 8.6.2016.2. Out of the wedlock of the petitioner with late Sh. Vishwa Prakash two children were born namely Sh. Suvrat Prakash and Smt. Shipra Prakash and who are arrayed as respondent nos. 2 and 3 to this petition. Respondent nos. 2 and 3 have given their no objection to the grant of letters of administration with the Will annexed to the Test Case No.28/2017 Page 1 of 3 petitioner. Respondent no.4 in this petition is the mother of the deceased S...
Kailash Aggarwal & Anr vs.chandan & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2018
$~35 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) 36/2018 & CM Nos. 8706-8707/2018 % Date of decision :7. h March, 2018 KAILASH AGGARWAL & ANR Through : Mr. Sachin Chopra and ..... Appellants versus Mr. Shubhnit Hans, Advs. CHANDAN & ANR Through : None ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE CM No.8707/2018 (exemption) 1.2. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. The application is disposed of. FAO(OS) 36/2018 & CM No.8706/2018 1. This appeal emanates out of a suit for specific performance being CS(OS) No.1279/2010 Kailash Aggarwal & Anr. v. Chandan Ramamurthi & Anr.2. The appellant before us who is the plaintiff in the suit, has assailed an order dated 11th January, 2018 to the extent that it records the following : FAO(OS)No.36/2018 Page 1 of 4 4. Future defaults of the plaintiffs in appearance inspite of the matter being listed in the cause list shall be treated as non-readin...
M/S Sawhney Bros. Vs.hongkong Shanghai Banking Corporation & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % M/s SAWHNEY BROS. CS(OS) No.1/1982 7th March, 2018 ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Rajan Sabharwal, Advocate. versus HONGKONG SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Dalip Mehra and Ms. Shikha Mehra, Advocates for D-1. Ms. Sunita Dutt, Advocate for D-13 (Insurance Company). CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a suit filed by the plaintiff M/s Sawhney Brothers, a partnership firm, seeking recovery of Rs.70 lacs. There are a total of fourteen defendants in the suit. I need not narrate all the causes of action against all the fourteen defendants, inasmuch as, the counsel for the plaintiff seeks now a decree only against the defendant nos. 2 to 8 i.e the partnership firm of defendant no.2/M/s Orient Enterprises with its partners being defendant nos. 3 to 5, and the partnership firm of CS(OS) No.1/1982 Page 1 of 24 defendant no.6 known as M/...
Ram Babu vs.ajay Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2018
$~6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :-"7th March, 2018 CM(M) 494/2016 & CM Nos. 19155-57/2016... Petitioner in person. ........ Petitioner Through: RAM BABU + CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA AJAY KUMAR ORDER (ORAL) Versus Through: Mr. Sunil Choudhari, Advocate. ..... Respondent 1. The petition at hand was filed to challenge the legality of orders dated 29.05.2015 and 11.04.2016 passed by the additional district judge in execution proceedings (execution case No.04/13) taken out by the respondent against the petitioner.2. The respondent had instituted a suit (no.40/11/08) for recovery of money against the petitioner. The said suit was decreed by judgment dated 15.12.2011 of the court of additional district judge granting recovery of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) with interest at 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization of the decretal amount besides cost of Rs.7,233/-. CM(M) No494/2016 Page 1 of 7 3. The petitioner (judgment debtor) h...
Icici Bank Ltd vs.vishal Baisla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2018
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA82017 & CM APPLs. 234/2017 & 236/2017 Date of Decision:7. h March, 2018 ICICI BANK LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Punit K. Bhalla, Ms. Chetna Bhalla, Ms. Kashish Narang & Mr. Darpan Bains, Advocates (M- 9810080772). versus VISHAL BAISLA Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.(Oral) 1. This is an appeal arising out of judgment dated 20th September, 2016 by which the suit filed by ICICI Bank (hereinafter `Plaintiff Bank') has been dismissed on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. The bank filed a suit for recovery for a sum of Rs.5,38,620.94/-.2. In July, 2014, the Defendant approached the Plaintiff bank for a sum of Rs.5,11,200/- for purchase of a vehicle Maruti Swift VDI. The loan was repayable in 36 equal instalments of Rs.16,700/- each. Defendant paid merely two instalments and thereafter stopped making any payments. The Plaintiff bank issued a loan recall notice dated 13th ...
Cepco Industries Private Limited vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2018
$~63 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:07. 03.2018 + W.P.(C) 2123/2018 & CM Nos.8811-12/2018 CEPCO INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jai Sahai Endlaw, Mr. Sanyat Lodha, Ms. Hansa Kaul and Mr. Deepak Joshi, Advs. ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Pratyush Miglani, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA CORAM:-"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER % RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) CM No.8812/2018 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) 2123/2018 & CM No.8811/2018 2. Issue notice. Mr. Pratyush Miglani, who appears on advance notice accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.3. Learned counsel for the respondent says that he has obtained instructions from the concerned officer i.e., Mr. Rajnish Kumar Jha, Deputy L&DO. Learned counsel says that he is instructed to convey to the court that the concerned officer will grant a hearing to the petitioner with regard to the representation made qua W.P.(C) 2123/2018 Page...
- ‹ Prev
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- Next ›
- Last »