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.
Ram Avtar vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-2018
$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:13. 08.2018 + BAIL APPLN. 1844/2018 RAM AVTAR GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : : Mr. Pawan Kr. Bahl, Adv. Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, APP for the State with SI Sandeep Kumar, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA % ORDER1308.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. 29326/2018 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. BAIL APPLN. 1844/2018 1. The petitioner seeks interim bail for a period of two months in FIR No.18/2014 under Sections 21/25/29/of the NDPS Act read with Sections 468/4of the IPC, Police Station Special Cell, Sector-6, Rohini, Delhi, on the ground that the wife of the petitioner requires urgent surgery.2. The status report has been filed. The same is taken on record. As per BAIL APPLN. 1844/2018 Page 1 of 2 the status report, the factum of operation is confirmed. Medical documents...
Rajesh vs.the State Govt of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-2018
$~R14 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A.685/2017 ..... Appellant Through : Ms. Rakhi Dubey, Advocate versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI Through : Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP ..... Respondent RAJESH CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VINOD GOEL % Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: JUDGMENT13.08.2018 1. This is an appeal directed against a judgment dated 28th April 2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in SC No.97/2014 arising out of FIR No.55/2014 registered at Police Station (PS) Gulabi Bagh convicting the Appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC. The appeal also challenges the subsequent order on sentence dated 23rd May 2016 whereby the Appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for life along with Rs.5,000/- fine and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months.2. The trial Court, in the order on sentence passed in the aforementioned case, noted that the deceased Reeta was the wife of the Ap...
Raja Ram Jindal vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-2018
$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:13. h August, 2018 + W.P.(C) 4192/2017 RAJA RAM JINDAL ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Anil K. Aggarwal, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent CORAM: Through Mr. Pradeep Kumar Jha, Advocate for UOI. Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate, for L&B/LAC. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings initiated in respect of the land of petitioners comprised in Khasra no.3min and min total measuring 1 bigha 7 biswas i.e. 1352 sq. yds., situated in the revenue estate of village Rani Khera, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the subject land) are deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettleme...
Rakesh Kumar Sharma vs.east Delhi Municipal Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-2018
#44 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:13. 08.2018 W.P.(C) 8419/2018 RAKESH KUMAR SHARMA ........ Petitioner versus EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr. Rama Shankar, Advocate : Mr. Ajjay Aroraa and Mr. Kapil Dutta, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) CM APPL.32337/2018 (Exemption) Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of accordingly. W.P.(C) 8419/2018 Page 1 of 3 W.P.(C) 8419/2018 1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays as follows:-"i) ii) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent to de-seal the property bearing No.B-20/29, Gali No.2, Khasra No.21/22, Kamal Vihar, Karaval Nagar, Delhi-110094, measuring 100 sq. Yards consisting of hall at gr...
Neeraj Mann vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-10-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:30. h July 2018 Decided on:10. h August 2018 + SUNIL @ SONU STATE + CRL.A. 513/2017 ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Purnima, Advocate for Mr.Ajay Verma, Advocate. versus Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP. ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1130/2016 NEERAJ MANN Through: Mr Rahul Sharma and Mr.AnreshKaushik, Advocates. ..... Appellant STATE + INDERJEET STATE + SUBHASH versus Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP. ..... Respondent CRL.A. 158/2017 ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Saahila Lamba, Advocate. versus Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP. ..... Respondent CRL.A. 583/2017 ..... Appellant Crl.A. 513/2017 & connected matters Page 1 of 23 Through: Ms. Purnima, Advocate for Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate. versus STATE CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP. ..... Respondent JUSTICE VINOD GOEL JUDGMENT % Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. These four appeals are directed against the judgment dated 24th August 2016 passed by the learned Additional Session...
Suresh Singhal vs.a K Acharya
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-10-2018
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:10. 08.2018 CRL.M.C. 5859/2014 & Crl. M.C. 19963/2014 SURESH SINGHAL A K ACHARYA versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the... RESPONDENTS: None. Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1008.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. None appears for the Respondent. He has already been declared a proclaimed offender by the trial court.2.... Petitioner impugns order dated 25.11.2014 whereby the revision petition of the petitioner impugning order dated 08.05.2014 of the trial court directing the petitioner to refund the amount of Rs. 35,000/- to the respondent was dismissed.3.... Petitioner had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act contending that a cheque for a sum of Rs. 1,25,000/- issued by the respondent had been dishonoured. CRL.M.C. 5859/2014 Page 1 of 3 4. Subsequently, there ...
Aruna Singal vs.the Secretary Gen.(lok Sabha)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-10-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: Pronounced on:10. h August, 2018 26th July, 2018 + W.P.(C) 4587/2002 ARUNA SINGAL ........ Petitioner Through Mr. S. S. Ray, Mr. Vaibhav Gulia and Mrs. Rakhi Ray, Advocates versus THE SECRETARY GEN.(LOK SABHA) ..... Respondent Through Mr. Pramod Gupta, Ms. Mudita Sharda and Ms. Manogya Singh, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR % JUDGMENT C. HARI SHANKAR, J.1. This writ petition, at the instance of the petitioner Aruna Singal, impugns an order, dated 18th December, 2000, issued by the Secretary General of the Lok Sabha (as the petitioners disciplinary authority), which holds that the petitioner had failed to maintain integrity and indulged in acts unbecoming of an officer unauthorizedly with effect from 13.08.1996 and, as a sequitur, imposes, on the petitioner, the penalty of removal from service which shall ordinarily not be a W.P.(C) 4587/2002 Page 1 of 25 disqualification for her future employment in the Lok S...
Prabhabati Devi & Ors. Vs.icici Lombard Gen Insurance Co Ltd & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-10-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * Date of Decision: August, 10, 2018 + MAC.APP. 738/2017 & C.M. No.29703/2017 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD Through: Mr. Navneet Kumar, Advocate ..... Appellant versus PRABHABATI DEVI & ORS. + MAC.APP. 449/2018 Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate .....Appellants PRABHABATI DEVI & ORS. ICICI LOMBARD GEN INSURANCE CO LTD & ORS versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) Through: Mr. Navneet Kumar, Advocate .....Respondents 1. The above-captioned two cross appeals are directed against impugned Award of 19th April, 2017 vide which compensation of 31,03,624/- with interest @ 9% per annum has been awarded to Claimants on account of death of a bank peon/attendant-Chander Kumar, MAC.APP. 738/2017& 449.2018 Page 1 of 6 aged 55 years. The above-captioned first appeal is by the Insurer to seek exoneration from paying compensation granted, whereas in the above- captioned second ap...
Virender Kumar vs.east Delhi Municipal Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-10-2018
#58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:10. 08.2018 W.P.(C) 8338/2018 VIRENDER KUMAR versus ........ Petitioner EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Prashant Sharma and Mr. Amit Kr. Verma, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. Tushar Sannu with Mr. Ankit Jain, Advocates. Insp. Rajendra Prasad Sharma, Licensing Unit. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) 1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays as follows:-"In the facts and circumstances of the present case this Honble Court may pleased to: a) Pass a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order(s)/direction(s) against the respondent, thereby directing or ordering the respondent to allow a period of 15 days to the petitioner to remove his machines, raw/furnished material out of the premises so sealed by the respondent i.e. premises bearing H.No.15, Gali ...
Sanjay Kuamr Gupta & Anr vs.sony Pictures Networks India P Ltd & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-10-2018
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.627/2018 Reserved on :6. h August, 2018 Pronounced on :10. h August,2018 SANJAY KUAMR GUPTA & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Chander Lall, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sachin Gupta and Ms. Surabhi Grover, Advocates. versus SONY PICTURES NETWORKS INDIA P LTD & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J CM No.31250/2018(Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. RFA No.627/2018 & CM No.31249/2018 (stay) RFA NO.627/2018 Page 1 of 20 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(CPC) is filed by the plaintiffs in the suit impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 13.7.2018 by which the trial court has dismissed the suit of the appellants/plaintiffs alleging violation by the respondents/defendants of appellant's/plaintiff's copyright and confidentiality in the concept 'Jeeto Unlim...
- ‹ Prev
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- Next ›
- Last »