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.
Satish Kumar Mishra vs.megha Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~1 & 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. h September, 2018 + + SATISH KUMAR MISHRA ARB.P. 34/2013 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Hitendra Kumar Nahata & Ms. (M- Advocates Ritu Jain, 9910290400). MEGHA SINGH versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sunil Mund, Mr. Bharat Bhushan & Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocates (M- 9650273107). QUEENS FAIRMONT AND CS(OS) 3019/2014 ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sunil Mund, Mr. Bharat Bhushan & Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocates (M- 9650273107). SATISH KUMAR MISHRA & ANR versus ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Hitendra Kumar Nahata & Ms. (M- Advocates Jain, Ritu 9910290400). CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) ARB.P. 34/2013 & CRL.M.A. 12644/2018, I.As. 4704/2015, 6663/2015, 13107/2018 1. The present arbitration petition 34/2013 has been filed seeking reference to arbitration of disputes between the parties in respect of an agreement dated 19th January, 2011 containing the following clause: That in case of any disputes...
Smt. Raj Kumari Gupta and an vs.delhi Development Authority and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: September 25, 2018 + W.P.(C) 10107/2018 & CMs 9446-47/2018 1. SMT. RAJ KUMARI GUPTA AND ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocate with Mr. R.S.Rana and Mr. Pranvir Sethi, Advocates versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS. Through: Mr. B.S. Shukla, CGSC for .....Respondents respondent- UOI Mr. Rizwan, Advocate for respondents No.4 and 5 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL)... Petitioners are aggrieved by allotment of some portion of the subject land to respondent No.3 as they claim that they are owners and in possession of the subject land. The grievance now raised in this petition was already raised with respondents No.1 to 4 by way of a Representation of 5th July, 2018 (Annexure P-24 colly.). According to learned senior counsel for petitioners, there is no response to the aforesaid Representation (Annexure P-24 colly.).2. Learned senior counsel for petitioners submits that contesting partie...
Naim Ahmed & Ors. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~7 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"25th September, 2018 CRL. M.C.4642/2016 & Crl.M.A. 19372/2016 NAIM AHMED & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Tashriq Ahmad, Adv. versus STATE & ANR. Through: ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State with SI Devender Singh, PS Jafrabad. Mr. M. Shamikh, Adv. for R-2 alongwith R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The second respondent was married to first petitioner as per Muslim rites and ceremonies on 14.03.2012, the parties having lived together for sometime but no child having taken birth out of the wedlock. On 05.06.2014, the second respondent lodged first information report (FIR) No.308/2014 with police station Jafrabad alleging offences punishable under Sections 498A/4of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against her husband (the first petitioner), his brothers (second to fifth petitioners), his father (sixth petitioner), his mother ...
Nadeem Chaudhry & Ors. Vs.sunil Kumar & Ors. ( Icici Lombard General I ...
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 .....
Akshay Bipin vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~71 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:25. h September, 2018 + W.P.(C) 4616/2018 & CM No.17827/2018 AKSHAY BIPIN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Anil Soni, CGSC CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. I will duly and faithfully and to the best of my ability, knowledge, and judgment perform the duties of my office without fear or favor, affection or ill-will These words, infused with solemn intensity and pregnant with meaning, serve to guide every judicial officer, in our judicial hierarchy, and permeate every living millisecond of the career of the officer, and the discharge, by her, or him, of the sacred duty so solemnly entrusted to him by the Constitution, carrying with it the expectations and aspirations of the founding fathers of our land, and the fond hopes of the voiceless millions of the country.2. The task of the judicial officer is arduous, and unenviab...
Delhi Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation vs.kore Secur ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:25. 9.2018 + O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 4/2018 DELHI TOURISM AND TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhimanyu Garg with Mrs. Preety Makkar, Advs versus KORE SECURITY SERVICES ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ravindra Kumar Raizada, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vinay Kumar Bhasin, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) I.A. No.13112/2018 1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the rejoinder.2. 3. For the reasons given in the application, the delay is condoned. The application is disposed of. O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 4/2018 4. This petition has been filed under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short 1996 Act). The respondent in this matter resists the extension of time sought by the petitioner.5. The extension of the time sought by the petitioner in this particular matter has somewhat peculiar background. O.M.P.(MISC...
M/S Arora H/W & Paint Store vs.m/s Jawahar Chits (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.812/2018 + % M/S ARORA H/W & PAINT STORE25h September, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sami Ur Advocate 9990765845). Rehman, No.(Mobile versus M/S JAWAHAR CHITS (P) LTD. Through: ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No.39318/2018 (delay in re-filing) For the reason stated in the application, delay in re-filing is condoned, subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. RFA No.812/2018 & CM No.39317/2018 (stay) RFA8122018 Page 1 of 7 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 29.05.2018 by which the trial court has decreed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for an amount of Rs. 4,46,140/- alongwith pendente lite interest at 12% per annum and future interest at 6% per annum till realization.2. The facts of ...
Mr. Sonu @ Tinku vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~91 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 4901/2018 Judgment delivered on:25. 09.2018 MR.SONU @ TINKU STATE & ANR versus ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent: Mr.A.K.Sharma, Adv. Mr. Hirein Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with ASI Hawa Singh, P.S.Nihal Vihar CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2509.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) Crl.M.A.32874/2018 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 4901/2018 1. On the oral prayer of the petitioner, Smt.Maya Devi w/o. Sh.Rajinder is impleaded as petitioner No.2. Amended memo of parties and her affidavit is taken on record.2.... Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.62 of 2012 under Sections CRL.M.C. 4901/2018 Page 1 of 3 498A/406 of the IPC registered at Police Station Nihal Vihar, Delhi, based on a settlement. It is contended that the FIR was lodged consequent to a matrimonial discord.3. Learned couns...
Sudhir Kumar vs.east Delhi Municipal Corporation and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2018
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:25.09.2018 + W.P.(C) 7543/2017 SUDHIR KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja with Ms. Nisha Sharma, Advs. versus EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR Through: Ms. Jaikriti S. Jadeja, Adv. for EDMC ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO RAJENDRA MENON, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL) 1.... Petitioner has filed this writ petition in public interest challenging the office order dated 16.06.2017 issued by respondent No.2 East Delhi Municipal Corporation. Issue in question is with regard to formulating a policy for grant of licence to water cooling plants and installation of water trolleys/ATMs in EDMC area.2. The very issue, we are informed, is pending consideration before the single Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) 1242/2017 and on petitioners own showing that he has filed an application for impleadment in the said writ petition challenging the very same policy dated 16.06...
Icici Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd vs.nadeem Chaudhry & Ors.
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 .....
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »