Delhi Court September 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.
National Insurance Co Ltd vs.manoj Kumar & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: September 25, 2018 + MAC.APP. 159/2018 + MAC.APP. 160/2018 + MAC.APP. 161/2018 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD .....Appellant Through: Ms. Shantha Devi Raman and Mr. Arihant Jain, Advocates versus MANOJ KUMAR & ORS. MANOJ KUMAR & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Jitender Kamra, Advocate + MAC.APP. 859/2018 .....Appellant 1. MANOJ KUMAR & ORS. Through: Mr. Jitender Kamra, Advocate versus JAGDISH PARIHAR & ANR. (NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD) Through: Ms. Shantha Devi Raman and .....Respondents Mr. Arihant Jain, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) The above captioned four appeals arise out of impugned Award of 7th October, 2017, vide which the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (henceforth referred to as the Tribunal) has awarded compensation of MAC.APP. 159/2018, 160/2018, 161/2018 & 859/2018 Page 1 of 8 51,72,000/-(rounded of) with interest @ 9% p.a. to legal heirs of Surendra, Head Constable in Delhi Police, a...
Newhilla K Marak vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~18 * + W.P.(C) 9917/2018 & CM No.38657/2018 (for stay) NEWHILLA K MARAK Through: Mr. Anand Mishra, Adv. ........ Petitioner UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj & Mr. Versus T.P. Singh, Advs. for R-1&2. Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee & Ms. Aprajita Mukherjee, Advs. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW % This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks (i) a ORDER2509.2018 1. mandamus to the respondent no.3 Resident Commissioner, Government of Meghalaya to allow the petitioner to stay in Quarter No.1, Grade-III, Meghalaya House, 9 APJ Abdul Kalam Road, New Delhi till her retirement from her service with the respondent no.3 and to allot the same in the name of the petitioner; and, (ii) quashing of the show cause notice dated 13th January, 2017 asking the petitioner to show cause why the order of eviction should not be made against her.2. The petition came up first before this Court o...
State Gnct Delhi vs.mohd. Faisal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:25. h September, 2018 CRL.L.P. 566/2017 STATE GNCT DELHI ........ Petitioner Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP versus for the State. Mr. Ajay M. Lal, Advocate for Complainant MOHD. FAISAL Represented by: Mr. Mohd. Sajid, Advocate ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) Crl.M.A. No.16104/2017 (Delay) For the reasons stated in the application delay of 22 days in filing the leave to appeal petition is condoned. Application is disposed of. CRL.L.P. 566/2017 1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 31st May 2017 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the respondent for offences punishable under Sections 354B/354D IPC and Sectionsof Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short POCSO Act), State has preferred the present leave petition.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 10th December 2013, the victim/complainant along with her parents went to the police station a...
Bon Lon Securities Ltd. Vs.icri Research Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~CP-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:25. 09.2018 + CO.PET. 861/2015 BON LON SECURITIES LTD. Through Mr.Rajiv K Garg, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus ICRI RESEARCH PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr.Sunil Chaudhary, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) This petition is filed under Sections 433(e) and 434(f) of the 1. Companies Act, 1956 seeking winding up of the respondent Company.2. The case of the petitioner is that on 14.06.2018 in the normal course of its business, the petitioner provided Inter-Corporate Deposit of Rs.50 lakhs to the respondent subject to interest @ 18% p.a. and repayable within a period of 90 days. To secure the interest of the petitioner, the respondent executed a promissory note for Rs.50 lakhs as well as handed over post dated cheque dated 13.09.2008 for the aforesaid amount of Rs.50 lakhs. The respondent also handed over a cheque dated 14.06.2008 for a sum of Rs.1,76,202/- towards the interest of th...
National Project Construction Corporation vs.construction Rasa Pvt. Lt ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~6 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: September 25, 2018 REVIEW PET. 522/2017 IN EFA(OS) 23/2015 NATIONAL PROJECT CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Rajat Arora, Adv. versus CONSTRUCTION RASA PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Kant Raman Singh, Director of respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA JUDGMENT A. K. CHAWLA, J1 By the petition filed under Section 114 read with Section 151 CPC in short 'the subject petition', the petitioner-Construction Rasa Pvt. Ltd. in short 'CRPL' seeks review of the judgment dated 16.05.2016 passed by this Court in EFA (OS) 23/2015. Rev. Pet. 522/2017 in EFA(OS) 23/2015 Page 1 of 6 2. Vide judgment dated 16.05.2016, this Court expressed its opinion as to the true construction of the award as regards the element of interest payable by non-applicant - National Project Construction Ltd. in short 'NPCC' under an award by the Arbitrator (published under the ...
Shadam Hussain vs.state of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~81 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 4895/2018 Judgment delivered on:25.09.2018 SHADAM HUSSAIN versus STATE OF DELHI & ORS. ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Ms. Parul Rohatgi, Advocate with petitioner in person. For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State with SI Devender. Mr. Ishwar Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2509.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.558/2016 under SectionsIPC, Police Station Kotwali, based on the settlement.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the petitioner, who is a tailor, had misbehaved with the complainant respondent No.2 when she had gone for having her clothes stitched. Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are cited as witnesses to the said incident. Crl.M.C.4881/2018 Page 1 of 3 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have settled their disput...
Refrigerated Water Licensees Association vs.east Delhi Municipal Corpo ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6698/2017 Date of Decision:25.09.2018 REFRIGERATED WATER LICENSEES ASSOCIATION ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Aly Mirza, Adv. versus EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Jaikriti S. Jadeja, Adv. for EDMC/R-1 Ms. Namrata Mukim, Adv. for North DMC/R-2 Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel with Mr. Hem Kumar & Mr. Pritish Sabharwal, Advs. for SDMC CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO RAJENDRA MENON, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL) This petition in public interest was filed with the following payers:1. A. A Writ/Order/Direction in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ(S) Order(S) And Direction(S) thereby Quashing the Circular/Office order dated 16.6.2017 and all action taken pursuant thereto by the respondent No.1. B. A Writ/Order/Direction in the nature of Prohibition or any other appropriate writ(s) order(s) and direction(s) thereby prohibiting...
Naved Haider Kajmi & Ors vs.state (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:25. h September, 2018 W.P.(CRL) 1683/2018 NAVED HAIDER KAJMI & ORS ........ Petitioners Represented by: Mr. Arvind K. Srivastava and Mr. versus Arvind Tiwari, Advocates. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Represented by: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, Additional Standing Counsel for State with ASI Devinder Singh, PS Aman Vihar. Mr. Ravinder Narwal, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. By this petition, petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.1218/2017 under Sections 498A/4IPC registered at PS Aman Vihar, New Delhi.2. Respondent No.2 lodged the above noted FIR against the petitioners stating that she was married to the petitioner No.1 on 28th March, 2015 according to Muslim Rites and Customs. In her marriage parents and relations spent money beyond their capacity spending 25 lakhs on jewellery, furniture, clothes, utensils and other util...
Gaurav Swaroop vs.sunil Kumar & Ors. (Icici Lombard General Insurance ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (i) + MAC.APP. 154/2017 Date of Decision: September 25, 2018 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD Through: Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate ..... Appellant Versus GAURAV SWAROOP & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Kunwerpal Singh, Advocate (ii) + MAC.APP. 500/2018 GAURAV SWAROOP ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Kunwerpal Singh, Advocate Versus SUNIL KUMAR & ORS. (ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD) Through: Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate ........ RESPONDENTS (iii) + MAC.APP. 161/2017 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD Through: Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate ..... Appellant Versus NADEEM CHAUDHRY & ORS. Through: Mr. Kunwerpal Singh, Advocate ........ RESPONDENTS * MAC.APP. 161/2017 MAC.APP. 752/2018 MAC.APP. 154/2017 MAC.APP. 500/2018 Page 1 of 11 (iv) + MAC.APP. 752/2018 1. NADEEM CHAUDHRY ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Kunwerpal Singh, Advocate Versus SUNIL KUMAR & ORS. ( ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ) Through: Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate .....
Deepak Kumar vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~96 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:25.09.2018 CRL.REV.P. 832/2018 DEEPAK KUMAR versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Mr. Puneet Goel, Advocate. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the... RESPONDENTS : CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for the State. SI Sonu Siwach, PS Sarai Rohilla. JUDGMENT2509.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) Crl.M.A.32909/2018 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.REV.P. 832/2018 & Crl.M.A.32908/2018 (stay) 1. The petitioner impugns orders dated 06.08.2018 and 05.09.2018, wherein, the Trial Court has recorded the testimony of the prosecution witnesses Pratima and Nand Lal respectively and thereafter discharged them. CRL.REV.P. 832/2018 Page 1 of 3 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that sufficient opportunity was not given to the counsel for the defence to be ready for the cross-examination of the said...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »