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.
Mandeep Singh vs.state (Govt of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:28. h August, 2018 Pronounced on:05. h September, 2018 + TEST.CAS. 31/2016 MANDEEP SINGH Through Mr.Gaurav ........ Petitioner Puri, Ms.Tanya Chawla, Mr.Aditeya Bali and Ms.Neha Khurana, Advocates. versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through Mr.Kaustubh Anshurar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This petition is under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 filed by petitioner for grant of letter of administration in respect of immovable property bearing No.34, Hemkunt Colony, Greater Kailash I, New Delhi (for short the subject property) being the sole surviving legal heir of deceased owner Swaran Jit Singh.2. a) The facts of the petition in brief are as follows:-"petitioner claims to be an adopted son of one Swaran Jit Singh and Smt.Balbir Kaur vide vide adoption order dated Test Cas.No.31/2016 Page 1 of 3 03.09.1973 passed by learned District Judge, Delhi under S...
s.p. Rawat vs.m/s Universal Financers
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2018
$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h September, 2018. + O.M.P. 416/2005 S.P. RAWAT ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sandeep Sharma and Mr. Aman Dhyrim Advocates. (M:-"9717464364) versus M/S UNIVERSAL FINANCERS Through: None ..... Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) 1. Repeated attempts have been made to contact counsel for M/s Universal Financers as also counsels for Decree Holders No.1 and 2 Mrs. Suman Arora and Mr. Shekhar Arora respectively. Despite sending e-mails and speed post letter, no response has been received. The copy of the e-mail and postal receipt are taken on record. They are proceeded ex-parte and the matter is being heard in their absence.2. The present OMP has been filed challenging the award dated 23rd May, 2002 passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator - Mr. Harminder Singh. The entire award is in two paragraphs and the same is captured herein below: By an agreement dt. 15.5.2001, I was appointed Sole...
Sharmila & Ors. Vs.new India Assurance Co Ltd & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: September 05, 2018 + MAC.APP. 53/2018 SHARMILA & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate versus NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. J.P.N. Shahi and Ms. Komal Dhingra, Advocates Mr. Rajiv Kumar Tiwari, respondent No.3 in person + MAC.APP. 171/2018 .....Appellants Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate RADHA DEVI & ANR. versus RAJIV KUMAR TIWARI & ORS. (THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD) ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. J.P.N. Shahi and Ms. Komal Dhingra, Advocates Mr. Rajiv Kumar Tiwari, respondent No.3 in person + MAC.APP. 187/2018 ANITA DEVI & ORS. .....Appellants Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate MAC.APP. 193/2018, 214/2018 & 215/2018 Page 1 of 6 versus RAJIV KUMAR TIWARI & ORS (THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD ) .....Respondents Through: Mr. J.P.N. Shahi and Ms. Komal Dhingra, Advocates Mr. Rajiv Kumar Tiwari, respondent No.3 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % (...
Ruhi Arora & Anr vs.registrar General Delhi High Court
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2018
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision:05. 09.2018 W.P.(C)No.7054/2018 RUHI ARORA & ANR Through : Mr. Prashant Manchanda, Adv. versus ........ Petitioners REGISTRAR GENERAL DELHI HIGH COURT ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(ORAL) The petitioners, who were candidates to the Delhi Judicial 1. Service Examination held on 06.05.2018, contend that the answer keys to five questions i.e. Question Nos.48, 99, 130, 139 and 184 (of Booklet D), were incorrect and that appropriate credit ought to be given to them. The Delhi High Court Establishment which is arrayed as the respondent resisted the proceedings. At the advanced stage, the court had required the ld. counsel for the respondent to obtain instructions. The court was informed during the proceedings that the concerned Committee has considered the overall circumstances and decided to contest these proc...
Yashvir Singh vs.state (Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2018
$~R-32 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Decided on:05. h September, 2018 CRL.A. 553/2001 & CRL.M.A. 8758/2017 YASHVIR SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.K. Rai with Mr. Jyotinder Kumar, Advocates. Versus STATE (DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for State with SI Ramesh Kumar, P.S. Sultan Puri. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The appellant was sent up for trial upon conclusion of investigation into first information report (FIR) no.5of police station Sultan Puri under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by report under Section 173 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973, presented in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate on 05.11.1998. The case having been committed, he was brought before the court of Sessions (in sessions case no.132/98) and put on trial on the charge for offence punishable under Sections 304 Part-II and 308 of Indian Penal code, 1860 (IPC), the gravamen thereof being that, on 08.08.1998 at about 5.30 p.m...
Amit Malik & Ors. Vs.the State & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2018
$~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:05. 09.2018 + W.P.(CRL) 2631/2018 AMIT MALIK & ORS. versus THE STATE & ANR. Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS For the... Petitioner For the Respondent CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Roshan Lal Saini and Ms. Kavita Saini, Advocates. Ms. Iti Pandey, Advocate for Ms. Nandita Rao, Advocate for State with W/ASI Sunita : : JUDGMENT0509.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. 31347-48 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(CRL) 2631/2018 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners prays for exemption from personal appearance on behalf of petitioner No.2 & 3. Learned counsel submits that petitioner No.2 and 3 are father and mother of petitioner No.W.P.(CRL) 2631/2018 Page 1 of 3 1 and on account of their health condition, they could not be present personally in Court. Their affidavits in support of the petition have been filed. In view of the above...
Arun Sangwan vs.state of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2018
* % + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:5. h March, 2018 Decided on:5. h September, 2018 CRL.A. 1035/2016 ARUN SANGWAN ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. M.K. Choudhary, Adv. versus STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP with SI R.S. Pandit PS Preet Vihar. CRL.A. 1059/2016 ZAKIR ALI STATE Represented by: Mr. C.M. Khan, Mr. Avinash ..... Appellant versus Sharma, Advs. Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP with SI R.S. Pandit PS Preet Vihar. ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1070/2016 MOHD. IMRAN ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Puneet Mittal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. C.M. Khan, Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Ms. Asma Choudhary, Ms. Sheeba Khan, Mr. Ankur Goel, Mr. Soaib Khan, Advs. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent CRL.A. 1035/2016, 1059/2016 & 1070/2016 Page 1 of 12 Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP with SI R.S. Pandit PS Preet Vihar. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 The present appeals are directed against the judgment dated...
Ashish vs.state of Nct, Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2018
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:05. 09.2018 % + BAIL APPLN. 2020/2018 ASHISH versus STATE OF NCT, DELHI Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Mr. Ajay Jain with Ms. Aastha Chopra, Advocates. Mr. Kamal Kumar Ghai, APP for the State. SI Babita, PS Rajouri Garden. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT0509.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) BAIL APPLN. 2020/2018 & Crl.M.(Bail) 1338/2018 (for interim bail) 1. The petitioner seeks regular bail in case FIR No.252/2018 under Section 376 IPC, Police Station Rajouri Garden. The petitioner has been in custody since 25.04.2018. BAIL APPLN. 2020/2018 Page 1 of 3 2. The allegations in the FIR are that the prosecutrix came in contact with the petitioner through Facebook, thereafter they started chatting and subsequently met and became friends. It is contended that they also went to Haridwar where they booked a room in a hote...
Simarjit Singh vs.balbir Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :11. h July, 2018 Date of decision :05th September, 2018 RC. REV. 307/2018 SIMARJIT SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, Advocate. versus BALBIR SINGH ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Neeraj Jain, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT ANU MALHOTRA, J.1. The petitioner Simarjit Singh assails the impugned order dated 05.03.2018 of the learned Rent Controller, (West), in Eviction Petition No.whereby an application under Section 25-B of the DRC Act, 1958 (as amended) filed by the petitioner herein seeking leave to defend the eviction petition filed by the respondent herein, i.e., Sh. Balbir Singh seeking eviction of the petitioner herein from the tenanted premises bearing no.WZ- 8Gali No.9, Guru Nanak Nagar, Outer Ring Road Delhi was declined, and it was held that the petitioner herein, i.e., the RC. REV. 307/2018 Page 1 of 20 respondent to the Eviction Petition No.had failed to raise any tri...
Atul Kumar Gupta & Ors. Vs.the State & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2018
$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:05. 09.2018 + W.P.(CRL) 2639/2018 ATUL KUMAR GUPTA & ORS. ........ Petitioners versus THE STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : : Mr. Manobal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC with Ms. Jyoti Babbar, Advocate with SI Parmod Kumar, PS Sangam Vihar. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT0509.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. 31383/2018 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(CRL) 2639/2018 1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.164 of 2015 under Sections 498A/4IPC registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, Delhi, based on a settlement. The subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord.2. W.P.(CRL) 2639/2018 Page 1 of 3... Petitioner No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2.... Petitioner No.2 and 5 are the other family members of petitioner No.1.3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the...
- ‹ Prev
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- Next ›
- Last »