Delhi Court August 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.
Beermati Devi vs.chandan Singh & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. t August, 2018. RSA No.117/2018 BEERMATI DEVI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Mukesh M. Goel and Ms. Arti Rawat, Advs. Versus CHANDAN SINGH & ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW CM No.33677/2018 (for exemption) Through: None. ........ RESPONDENTS 1.2. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. The application is disposed of. (for RSA No.117/2018 & CMs No.33678/2018 & 33679/2018 condonation of delay of 324 days in filing and 53 days in re-filing the appeal respectively) 3. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the judgment and decree [dated 28th March, 2017 in RCA DJ No.60903/2016 of the Court of Additional District Judge-08 (West)]. in First Appeal under Section 96 of the CPC preferred by the appellant against the judgment and decree [dated 4th October, 2013 in Suit Old No.678/2000 and New No.406/20of the Court of Senior Civil Judge (West)]. of dismissal of ...
Ramesh Chander vs.m/s Shiv Infra Promoters Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2018
* + % RAMESH CHANDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.211/2017 21st August, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Anil Kumar Chunduru, No.(Mobile Advocate 9811335435). versus M/S SHIV INFRA PROMOTERS PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. 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 26.10.2016 by which the trial court has dismissed the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff for recovery of Rs.4,30,860/- being interest for the period of delay from 29.9.2011 till 4.11.2011 with respect to encashment of the cheque for an amount of Rs.1,82,01,960/-,and which cheque amount was the RFA No.211/2017 Page 1 of 5 consideration with respect to selling of the property of the appellant/plaintiff to the respondent/defendant.2. The facts of the case are tha...
Mahesh Chand Meena vs.the State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 4214/2018 $~57 * + MAHESH CHAND MEENA versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent: : Mr.Pankaj Srivastav, Advocate Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate with SI Raj Kumar, HC Lomesh, PS Nebsarai Mr. Raj Kumar Dewani, Advocate for complainant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA % JUDGMENT2108.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.357 of 2018 under Sections 325 IPC Police Station Nebsarai.2. As per the allegations against the petitioner, the petitioner, who is a teacher in the school, had slapped the complainant on account of which he sustained injury in his ear.3. Both the parties are present in person in Court today, represented by their counsels and are identified by the Investigating Officer. They submit that they have settled their all disputes. The petitioner has already paid for the...
Rajiv Jain vs.shashi Bhatnagar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2018
+ % RAJIV JAIN IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.764/2017 21st August, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Siddhant Asthana and Mr. Chhetarpal Singh, Advocates (Mobile No.9818501011). versus SHASHI BHATNAGAR ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Namita Sharma and Mr. Sandeep Thukral, Advocates (Mobile No.9891072729). CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant in the suit impugning the judgment of the Trial Court dated 25.7.2017 by which the trial court has decreed the suit for possession and mesne profits filed by the respondent/plaintiff.2. I may note that this appeal was only pressed with respect to rate of mesne profits and appellant/defendant agreed to vacate the RFA No.764/2017 Page 1 of 4 suit premises on or before 30.9.2017. This order dated 4.9.2017 reads as under:-"1. After arguments, this appeal ...
Latika Sharma vs.moti Ram & Ors (Tata Aig General Ins Co Ltd)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * Date of Decision: August 21, 2018 + MAC.APP. 408/2017 SAVITRI DEVI (DECEASED) THR HER LRS ..... Appellant Through: Mr. V.V. Gautam and Mr. Prashant Dubey, Advocates versus MOTI RAM & ORS (TATA AIG GENERAL INS CO LTD) ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Navneet Goel, Advocate for Mr. Sameer Nadwani, Advocate for respondent-Insurer + MAC.APP. 415/2017 MADHU Through: Mr. V.V. Gautam and Mr. Prashant ..... Appellant versus Dubey, Advocates MOTI RAM & ORS (TATA AIG GENERAL INS CO LTD) ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Navneet Goel, Advocate for Mr. Sameer Nadwani, Advocate for respondent-Insurer + MAC.APP. 418/2017 LATIKA SHARMA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. V.V. Gautam and Mr. Prashant Dubey, Advocates versus MAC.APP. 408/2017 MAC.APP. 415/2017 MAC.APP. 418/2017 Page 1 of 11 1. MOTI RAM & ORS (TATA AIG GENERAL INS CO LTD) ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Navneet Goel, Advocate for Mr. Sameer Nadwani, Advocate for respondent-Insurer CORAM: HON'BLE MR....
Sanjay Kumar Goel vs.paradeep Phosphates Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. t August, 2018. SANJAY KUMAR GOEL RSA482018 * % + CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW CM No.11509/2018 (for exemption) 1. PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LTD. Through: None. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. Versus Through: Mr. Pawan K. Behl, Adv. ..... Appellant ..... Respondent 2. The application is disposed of. RSA482018 & CMs No.11510/2018 & 11511/2018 (for condonation of 168 days delay in filing and 45 days in re-filing the appeal respectively) 3. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the judgment and decree [dated 17th April, 2017 in RCA No.61395/2016 (Old No.05/2010) of the Court of Additional District Judge-06 (Central)]. of dismissal of First Appeal under Section 96 of the CPC preferred by the appellant against the judgment and decree [dated 12th July, 2010 in Suit No.1107/of the Court of Senior Civil Judge (Central)]. in a suit filed by the appellant/plainti...
Akachukwu Christopher Nnadi vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:12. h February, 2018 Judgment Delivered on:21. t August, 2018 CRL.A. 786/2016 AKACHUKWU CHRISTOPHER NNADI Represented by: Mr.J.S.Kushwaha, Advocate ..... Appellant versus STATE Represented by: Mr.Ashok Kumar Garg, APP for the ..... Respondent State CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1st August, 2016 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS whereby appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 21(b) of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short 'NDPS Act'). Vide order on sentence of the even date, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 21(b) of NDPS Act.2. Briefly stated, prosecution case is that on 10th October, 2013 at...
Tarun Singh @ Daksh Oberoi vs.state ( Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2018
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 3118/2018 Judgment delivered on:21.08.2018 TARUN SINGH @ DAKSH OBEROI ........ Petitioner STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) & ANR versus ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner(s) : For the Respondent(s): Mr.Ruchit Duggal, Adv. Mr.Kamal Kr.Ghai, Addl. PP for the State with SI Ajit Singh, P.S. Greater Kailash CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2108.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.226/2013 under Sections 354- A/354-D/419/506/507 IPC at Police Station Greater Kailash.2. The parties are known to each other and were friends. Subsequently, it is contended that on account of a misunderstanding the parties fell out and subject FIR was registered consequent to a quarrel that took place between the parties. It is alleged that petitioner thereafter attempted to defame the respondent.3. Parties were referred to mediation. They have settled their disputes ...
Lokesh Gupta & Ors. Vs.sukesh Chand Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % RFA Nos. 677/2018 & 678/2018 21st August, 2018 RFA No.677/2018 & CM No.33501/2018 (Stay) LOKESH GUPTA & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: versus Mr. Trideep Pais and Mr. Shivam Sharma, Advocates. (9717456124 SUKESH CHAND GUPTA ..... Respondent RFA No.678/2018 & CM No.33509/2018 (Stay) LOKESH GUPTA & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Trideep Pais and Mr. Shivam Sharma, Advocates. (9717456124) versus SUKESH CHAND GUPTA ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. RFA Nos.677/2018 & 678/2018 Page 1 of 9 VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No.33502/2018 (Exemption) in RFA No.677/2018 Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. RFA No.677/2018 & RFA No.678/2018 1. These two Regular First Appeals under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) are filed by the defendants in the suit impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 22.3.2018 by which the trial court h...
Ram Kumar vs.government of Nct of Delhi & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * Date of Order: August 21, 2018 Through: Mr. R.S.Tomar, Advocate ........ Petitioner RAM KUMAR + W.P.(C) 9407/2017 & C.M. 38312/2017 Versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) 1. In this petition, a mandamus is sought to respondents to include petitioners name in the seniority list of recommendees for allotment of alternate plot in North Zone and to allot an alternative plot in the draw of lots at the earliest.2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner had taken recourse to Right to Information Act, 2005 and as per reply thereto, petitioners case for allotment of alternate plot might have been closed in September, 1994. Counsel for petitioner submits that no such information has been received by petitioner in response to his application (Annexure- A).3. Counsel for respondents at the outse...
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- Next ›
- Last »