Delhi Court January 2019 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2019 Page 18 of about 755 results (0.017 seconds)Senjil Gupta vs.north Delhi Municipal Corporation
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: January 25, 2019 + O.REF. 1/2017 SENJIL GUPTA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Jitender Choudhary, Adv. versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Puja Kalra, ASC with Mr. Virendra Singh, Adv. for R1. Mr. A.D.N. Rao and Mr. Sudipto Sircar, Amicus Curiae. AND + O.REF. 2/2017 SARITA RAJPUT & ORS. Through: Mr. Siddharth Arora, Adv. ........ Petitioners versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Puja Kalra, Adv. for R1. Mr. A.D.N. Rao and Mr. Sudipto Sircar, Amicus Curiae. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT O.Ref. 01/2017 and connected matter Page 1 of 16 V. KAMESWAR RAO, J O.REF. 1/2017 1. This reference being O.REF. 1/2017 has been made by the learned District and Sessions Judge (Hqs.) under Order XLVI of the Code of Civil Procedure on 11th December, 2017 with regard to the jurisdiction of the Court of District and Sessions Judge (Hqs.) Delhi f...
Tag this Judgment!National Institute of Fashion Technology vs.ram Saran
Court: Delhi
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. 01.2019 + W.P.(C) 4513/2018 & CM APPL. 17341/2018 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FASHION TECHNOLOGY Through Mr.Pratap Shaker with Ms.Rishu Agarwal, Advs. ........ Petitioner versus ..... Respondent RAM SARAN CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI Through None. REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL) 1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner impugns order dated 29.01.2018 passed by the Appellate Authority in Gratuity Appeal No.36(29)/2017 P.A. DYC in Claim Petition No.ALC- II/36(61)/2016/2016-AKB, whereby the petitioners appeal against the order passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as Act) has been rejected. The Controlling Authority had vide its order dated 30.08.2017 directed the petitioner to pay to the respondent simple interest @ of 10 % per annum for the delay in releasing the amount of Rs. Rs.95,792/- payable to him as gratuity.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not ...
Tag this Judgment!Universal Public School vs.seema Verma and Ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:25. h January, 2019 + MAC.APP. 338/2017 BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. 6th floor, Ashoka Bhawan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. ...Appellant No.1 Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur Advocate. versus 1. SEEMA VERMA (WIDOW) W/o Late Sh. Sandeep Verma, R/o H. No.107/II, Mintoo Road Complex, New Delhi.2. TANUSHKA VERMA (DAUGHTER) D/o Late Sh. Sandeep Verma, R/o H. No.107/II, Mintoo Road Complex, New Delhi.3. RINKU KUMAR (DRIVER) S/o Sh. Sunder Lal, R/o C-156, Block GL-8, Prem Vihar, Karawal Nagar, New Delhi.4. UNIVERSAL PUBLIC SCHOOL (OWNER) R/o Block A, Preet Vihar, New Delhi- 110092.5. SHAKUNTALA (MOTHER) W/o Sh. Radhey Verma, R/o H.No.C-1, Bal Nagar, Kartapura, Ward No.15, Tehsil District Jaipur, Rajasthan.6. RADHEY VERMA (FATHER) S/o Late Sh. Lal Verma, MAC.APPs. 338/2017 & 717/2017 Page 1 of 14 R/o H. No.C-1, Bal Nagar, Kartarpura, Ward No.15, Tehsil District Jaipur, Rajasthan ...... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar and ...
Tag this Judgment!Surender Kumar vs.m Salim
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:15. h January, 2019 Pronounced on:25. h January, 2019 + RC.REV. 56/2017 CM Appl. Nos.5069/2017, 23691/2017 SURENDER KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.R.D.Chauhan and Mr.Arun K Chauhan, Advocates. M SALIM ..... Respondent versus Through : In person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This revision challenges the impugned judgment dated 24.09.2016 passed by the learned Additional Rent Controller-02 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts (hereinafter Trial Court) in Eviction Petition E-80497/2016 in Mr.M.Salim vs Surender Kumar filed by the landlord/respondent herein against the tenant/petitioner herein under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (DRC Act).2. The learned Trial Court vide impugned order dismissed the leave to defend application of the petitioner and passed an eviction order in respect of shop No.2033, Rodgran, Lal Kuan, Delhi 110006 (hereinafter tenanted shop).3. Before coming...
Tag this Judgment!k.v.s. Vs.praveen Kumar
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. h January, 2019 REVIEW PET. 272/2018 in + W.P.(C) 16146/2004 K.V.S. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. S. Rajappa, Adv. versus PRAVEEN KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Meghna De, Adv. for Mr. Rajiv Agarwal, Adv. with respondent in person % 1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) This review petition, at the instance of the petitioner Praveen Kumar, in W.P.(C) 16146/2004, seeks review of the judgment, dated 18th January, 2018, passed by me, in the said writ petition.2. For the purposes of present review petition, a brief reference to the facts would suffice.3. The review petitioner, who was employed as a watchman with the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (who was the petitioner in the writ petition and, is, referred to, hereinafter, as the KVS), initiated an industrial dispute, challenging the termination, by the KVS, on 27th Review Pet. 272/2018 Page 1 of 14 May, 1992, of his services. The said dispute...
Tag this Judgment!Devika Chopra vs.parvati Chopra
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 25, 2019 CRL.M.C. 389/2019 DEVIKA CHOPRA Through: Mr. Satish Aggarwala and Mr. Vinay Jaidka, Advocates .....Petitioner versus PARVATI CHOPRA Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR .....Respondent ORDER (ORAL) Crl.M.A. 1685/2019 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.A. 1686/2019 (delay) There is delay of 78 days in re-filing the accompanying petition. For the reasons stated in the application, it is allowed and the delay is condoned. The application is disposed of. CRL.M.C. 389/2019 In proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as PWDV Act), trial court vide order of 16th May, 2016 has held that petition filed by respondent- applicant under the aforesaid enactment is maintainable and it is within the limitation, while observing that the last incident of domestic violence CRL.M.C. 389/2019 Page 1 of 2 is of 28th September, 2012 and ...
Tag this Judgment!R vs.s B K
Court: Delhi
$~15 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI R S B K Date of Decision:25. 01.2019 MAT.APP.(F.C.) 325/2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Trilok Chand and Ms.Rita, Advocates with Appellant in person. versus ..... Respondent Through: Respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH JYOTI SINGH, J.(ORAL) CM APPL. 53232/2018 (delay) 1. This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, filed by the appellant seeking condonation of 50 days delay in filing the appeal.2. The prayer made in this application is not opposed by the respondent who is present in court. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.3. The application stands disposed of. MAT. APP (F.C.) No.325/2018 Page 1 of 5 MAT.APP.(F.C.) 325/2018 4. The present appeal has been filed assailing the order dated 06.09.2018 vide which the Family Court has dismissed an application moved by the appellant under Order IX Rule-13 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1973 (CPC) read ...
Tag this Judgment!Delhi Wakf Board vs.mohd.bi & Ors
Court: Delhi
$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Order:25. 01.2019 C.R.P. No.1171/1989 DELHI WAKF BOARD ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Hashmat Nabi, Adv. with Ms.Swathi, Advocate. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL MOHD.BI & ORS Through: None. ........ RESPONDENTS CM No.3819/2019 (for restoration of the Revision Petition) and CM No.3820/2019 (for condonation of 7815 days delay in filing the restoration application) 1. This is an application filed on 13.12.2018 under Order XLI Rule 19 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for restoration of the Revision Petition, which was dismissed in default and for non-prosecution on 21.07.1997, to its original number with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of 7815 days (about 21 years) delay in filing the application for restoration of the revision petition. CRP No.1171/1989 Page 1 of 6 2. Learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner submits that the newly consti...
Tag this Judgment!Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.seema Verma and Ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:25. h January, 2019 + MAC.APP. 338/2017 BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. 6th floor, Ashoka Bhawan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. ...Appellant No.1 Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur Advocate. versus 1. SEEMA VERMA (WIDOW) W/o Late Sh. Sandeep Verma, R/o H. No.107/II, Mintoo Road Complex, New Delhi.2. TANUSHKA VERMA (DAUGHTER) D/o Late Sh. Sandeep Verma, R/o H. No.107/II, Mintoo Road Complex, New Delhi.3. RINKU KUMAR (DRIVER) S/o Sh. Sunder Lal, R/o C-156, Block GL-8, Prem Vihar, Karawal Nagar, New Delhi.4. UNIVERSAL PUBLIC SCHOOL (OWNER) R/o Block A, Preet Vihar, New Delhi- 110092.5. SHAKUNTALA (MOTHER) W/o Sh. Radhey Verma, R/o H.No.C-1, Bal Nagar, Kartapura, Ward No.15, Tehsil District Jaipur, Rajasthan.6. RADHEY VERMA (FATHER) S/o Late Sh. Lal Verma, MAC.APPs. 338/2017 & 717/2017 Page 1 of 14 R/o H. No.C-1, Bal Nagar, Kartarpura, Ward No.15, Tehsil District Jaipur, Rajasthan ...... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar and ...
Tag this Judgment!Mewa Lal Pal and Anr. Vs.union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~9. * + % W.P.(C) 10279/2017 and CM APPL. 41921/2017 MEWA LAL PAL AND ANR. Date of Decision:25. 01.2019 ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. A.K. Trivedi & Mr. Naveen Kumar, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Shipra Shukla, Advocate for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. CHAWLA VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 02.11.2017 passed by the Tribunal in a batch of Original Applications, including their O.A. No.4417/2013. The Tribunal, by the impugned order, has dismissed all the Original Applications, wherein, inter alia, the petitioners assailed the notice dated 27.11.2013 issued by the DRM Railways. By the said notice, it was communicated to the petitioners that the appointment of petitioner No.2/ Janardan Pal as Electric Khalasi under SSE/OHE/ PTNR under the LARSGESS Scheme on 20.08.2013 was W.P.(C.) No...
Tag this Judgment!