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.
Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited vs.delhi Metro Rail Corpor ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-2018
* IN THE HIGH CO URT O F DE L HI AT NEW DE LHI % Judgment delivered on:06. h March, 2018 + O.M.P. (COMM.) 307/2017 DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED ........ Petitioner Versus DELHI AIRPORT METRO EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED ........ RESPONDENTS + O.M.P. (I) (COMM.) 200/2017 AND DELHI AIRPORT METRO EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED ........ Petitioner Versus DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited: Mr. P Narasimha, ASG, Mr. Prag Tripathi and Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Senior Advocates with Mr. Tarun Johri, Mr. S. Sinha, Mr. Ankur Gupta, Mr. Ankit Saini and Mr. Giri Bhalla, Advocates For Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited: Mr. P. Chidambaram, and Mr. J.J.Bhatt, Senior Advocates with Mr. Mahesh Aggarwal, Ms. Anjali Chandurkar, Ms. Megha Mehta and Mr. Anuj Malhotra, Advocates O.M.P. (COMM.) 307/2017 & O.M.P. (I) (COMM.) 200/2017 Page 1 of 98 CORAM:-"HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACH...
R vs.p
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-2018
$~1 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:06. h March, 2018 CM(M) 1395/2017 & CM No.44831/2017 R P Through: Mr. Pragyan Pradip Sharma and Mr. ........ Petitioner Ganesh, Advs. with petitioner in person. versus Through: Mr. Gagan Gulia, Adv. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 01st December, 2017 whereby the learned Family Court granted temporary custody of two children to the respondent and granted visitation rights of the children to the petitioner on every 01st and 03rd Saturday in the Children Room of Family Court of Patiala House Courts.2. The parties have two children namely Master Vansh aged about 3 years and Master Ankur aged about 1 year. The petitioner handed over the temporary custody of Master Ankur to the respondent before this Court on 13th December, 2017 and the parties were referred to Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. On 21st December, 2017, the...
Sushil Chauhan & Ors vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-2018
$~53 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment :6th March, 2018 ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Raj Bahadur Singh, Advocate. versus + W.P.(C) 322/2016 CORAM: SUSHIL CHAUHAN & ORS UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Chiranjeev Kumar with Mr. Mukesh Sachdeva, Advs. for UOI. Ms. Astha Tyagi, Adv. for LAC. Ms. Niharika Ahluwalia & Ms. Anantika Singh, Advs. for DDA. 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 filed by the petitioners seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceeding with respect to land of the petitioners having half joint share comprised in Khasra nos.68 min (02-04), 68 min (0-05), total measuring 02 bighas 09 biswas, situated in the revenue estate of village Madanpur Khadar, Tehsil Mehrauli, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the subject land) stands lapsed in view of section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensatio...
Mohd. Chaman vs.mohd. Atiqur Rehman
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-2018
$~ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :16. h February, 2018 Decided on :06. h March, 2018 + RC. REV. 215/2011 and CM APPL.12857/2011 MOHD. CHAMAN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. S.D. Ansari, Advocate with Mr. I. Ahmed, Advocate Versus MOHD. ATIQUR REHMAN Through: Nemo. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT1 On the eviction petition (E.No.71/2009) instituted by the respondent joining with one Mohd. Naseem (since deceased and consequently deleted from the array), by judgment dated 08.12.2010, the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) passed an order of eviction in his favour and against the petitioner on the ground of bona fide need under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 in respect of the premises described as property bearing No.1218, Gali Mahal Sarai, Haweli Hissamuddin Haider, Punjabi Phatak, Ballimaran, Delhi-110006, as specifically shown in colour red in the site plan filed therewith. It is the said order the correctness, l...
Delhi Consumers Cooperative Wholesales Store Limited vs.m/s K N R Inte ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-2018
$~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 3073/2015{CS(COMM) 902/2017} DELHI CONSUMERS COOPERATIVE WHOLESALES STORE LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through Ms. Madhumeet Kapoor, Advocate versus M/S K N R INTERNATIONAL AND ANR .....Defendants Through None Date of Decision:06. h March, 2018 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) I.A. 2572/2018 1. Present application has been filed under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC read with Order XIII-A of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015. It is pertinent to mention that the present suit has been filed for recovery of Rs.1,27,37,263/- along with pendent lite and future interest at 18% per annum. The prayer clause in the present suit is reproduced hereinbelow:-"Pass a decree for a sum of Rs.1,27,37,263/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Seven Lacs Thirty Seven Thousand Two Hundred and sixty Three) against both the defendants. i CS(COMM) 902/2017 Page 1 of 8 ii. Pendent...
Parmendar Kumar vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~14 to 18, 20 to 26 * + W.P.(C) 8318/2017 & CM No.34197/2017 (Directions) + W.P.(C) 9158/2017 & CM No.37461/2017 (Stay) + W.P.(C) 9160/2017 & CM No.37470/2017 (Stay) + W.P.(C) 9162/2017 & CM No.37477/2017 (Stay) + W.P.(C) 9171/2017 & CM No.37494/2017 (Stay) + W.P.(C) 9255/2017 & CM No.37805/2017 (Stay) + W.P.(C) 9256/2017 & CM No.37807/2017 (Stay) + W.P.(C) 9288/2017 & CM No.37967/2017 (Stay) + W.P.(C) 9360/2017 & CM No.38191/2017 (Stay) + W.P.(C) 9364/2017 & CM No.38198/2017 (Stay) + W.P.(C) 9425/2017 & CM No.38349/2017 (Stay) + W.P.(C) 9427/2017 & CM No.38351/2017 (Stay) SANDEEP KUMAR YADAV JITENDRA YADAV HITESH KUMAR YADAV SUBHASH CHAND CHARAN SINGH YADAV NAVEEN KUMAR YADAV MOHIT YADAV PARMENDAR KUMAR NITESH KUMAR DEEPAK KUMAR RINKU AMIT YADAV ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner .....
The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs.j.c Sharma & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:06. h March, 2018 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Through: Mr. K.K. Bhat, Advocate ..... Appellant $~11 * % + MAC.APP. 746/2017 J.C SHARMA & ANR versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. S.C. Jain, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.2,69,608/- has been awarded to respondents No.1 and 2.2. The accident dated 29th March, 1986 resulted in the death of Ashok Kumar. The deceased was aged 25 years at the time of the accident and was survived by his father and sister who filed an application for compensation before the Claims Tribunal.3. Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of the hearing that the legal liability of the appellant in respect of the accident was limited to Rs.1,50,000/- by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and the Claims Tribunal erred in awarding the compensation beyond the statutory limit of th...
Kiran Kumar Anand vs.the Lt. Governor, National Capital Territory of D ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~7 * + W.P.(C) 3903/2015, CM APPL. 6971/2015, 3371/2016 Date of Judgement:6th March, 2018 KIRAN KUMAR ANAND .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Akhil Sachar, Advocate. Versus THE LT. GOVERNOR, NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF .....Respondents DELHI & ORS. Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with for Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate Ms. L&B/LAC. Mr. Nikhil Rohtagi with Mr. Shashank Khurana, Advocates for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.(Oral) 1. C.M No.3371/2016(Condonation of delay) This is an application filed by the DDA seeking condonation of delay of 115 days in filing the counter affidavit. There is no opposition to the prayer made in this application. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Delay of 115 days is hereby condoned. Counter affidavit filed by DDA is taken on record. W.P(C) 3903/2015 2. With the consent of the parties, the present Writ Petition is set down for fi...
Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited vs.delhi Airport Metro Express Pr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-2018
* IN THE HIGH CO URT O F DE L HI AT NEW DE LHI % Judgment delivered on:06. h March, 2018 + O.M.P. (COMM.) 307/2017 DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED ........ Petitioner Versus DELHI AIRPORT METRO EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED ........ RESPONDENTS + O.M.P. (I) (COMM.) 200/2017 AND DELHI AIRPORT METRO EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED ........ Petitioner Versus DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited: Mr. P Narasimha, ASG, Mr. Prag Tripathi and Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Senior Advocates with Mr. Tarun Johri, Mr. S. Sinha, Mr. Ankur Gupta, Mr. Ankit Saini and Mr. Giri Bhalla, Advocates For Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited: Mr. P. Chidambaram, and Mr. J.J.Bhatt, Senior Advocates with Mr. Mahesh Aggarwal, Ms. Anjali Chandurkar, Ms. Megha Mehta and Mr. Anuj Malhotra, Advocates O.M.P. (COMM.) 307/2017 & O.M.P. (I) (COMM.) 200/2017 Page 1 of 98 CORAM:-"HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACH...
Swatantra Bharat Mills and Dcm Silk Mills Ltd. Vs.delhi Development Au ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-2018
$~ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :20. h February, 2018 Decided on :6. h March, 2018 + CM (M) 1173/2010 SWATANTRA BHARAT MILLS AND DCM SILK MILLS LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Nayyar, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Meghna Mishra, Mr. Bimal Roy Jad, Mr. Varun Kumar, Mr. Saurabh Seth, Ms. Avshreya Rudy & Ms. Nandini Singh, Advs. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajiv Bansal, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Rukhmini Bobde & Ms. Vidhi Gupta, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER1 The petition at hand filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India sought to assail the order dated 25.03.2010 of the executing court (District Judge) passed on the file of miscellaneous execution case (No.80/10/03) whereby the application dated 08.08.2003 of DCM Shriram Consolidated Limited, owners of Swatantra Bharat Mills (SBM) and DCM Silk Mills (DCM) for review of earlier order dated 18.07.2003 under Order XLVII ...
- ‹ Prev
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- Next ›
- Last »