Delhi Court January 2019 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2019 Page 61 of about 755 results (0.044 seconds)Govind Rawat vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:9. h January, 2019 + W.P.(C) 5371/2017 % 1. GOVIND RAWAT ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Matrugupta Mishra and Ms. Aastha Chawla, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. V.S.R. Krishna and Mr. V. Shashank Kumar, Adv. for R- AIIMS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR J UD G M E N T (ORAL) The issue in controversy in this writ petition being very short, with consent of parties, the matter has been heard finally and is being disposed of by this judgment.2. Consequent to his application and response to admission notice No.2/2015, dated 10th May, 2015, issued by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), the petitioner was admitted for the post graduate course in Prosthodontics, conducted by the AIIMS on 1st July, 2015. The memorandum, dated 11th June, 2015, informing the petitioner of his selection and admission contained the following clause : W.P.(C) 5371/2017 Page 1 of 10 3. He/Sh...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs.santoshi Devi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:9. h January, 2019 + MAC. APP. 866/2017, CM APPL. 35159/2017 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ...Appellant No.1 Through: Mr. S. P. Jain, Advocate with Mr. Himanshu Gambhir and Mr. Kaur, Advocates. Amandeep versus 1. SANTOSHI DEVI W/o Lt. Sh. Bhure Lal 2. MASTER PRIYANSHU S/o Lt. Sh. Bhure Lal 3. BABY PRIYA D/o Lt. Sh. Bhure Lal 4. BABY PREETI D/o Lt. Sh. Bhure Lal 5. KUMAR LAL F/o Lt. Sh. Bhure Lal 6. ROHITASH GURJAR S/o Sh. Matadeen 7. HANSRAJ GURJAR S/o Sh. Matadeen ...Respondents + MAC. APP. 86/2018 ROHITASH GURJAR HANSRAJ GURJAR Through: Mr. S.N. Parasher, Advocate. ...Appellant No.2 ...Appellant No.3 MAC.APP. 866/2017, CM APPL. 35159/2017 & MAC.APP. 86/2018 Page 1 of 7 Through: Ms. Ankita Choudhary, Advocate. versus 1. SANTOSHI DEVI W/o Lt. Sh. Bhure Lal 2. MASTER PRIYANSHU S/o Lt. Sh. Bhure Lal 3. BABY PRIYA D/o Lt. Sh. Bhure Lal 4. BABY PREETI D/o Lt. Sh. Bhure Lal 5. KUMAR LAL F/o Lt. Sh. Bhure Lal 6. NEW INDIA ASSUR...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Kumar Garg vs.the State ( Govt of Nct of Delhi) & Ors
Court: Delhi
$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision :9. h January, 2019 W.P.(CRL) 3064/2018 SANJAY KUMAR GARG ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Shiv Charan Garg, Advocate versus THE STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS ....... RESPONDENTS Represented by: Mr.Ashish Aggarwal, ASC for the State with Mr.Piyush Singhal, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks further investigation in case FIR No.106/2016 under Section 302 IPC and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act registered at PS Maurice Nagar.... Petitioner is the complainant and husband of the deceased Smt.Anjali for whose alleged murder, Naveen Uppal @ Sunny was arrested and the abovenoted FIR was registered. The petitioners grievance in the petition is not against material collected against Naveen Uppal @ Sunny but he claims that since Naveen Uppal @ Sunny has used illegal arm and during the course of investigation no efforts have been made to tr...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish vs.state
Court: Delhi
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:09. 01.2019 BAIL APPLN. 3055/2018 JAGDISH STATE versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Mr. Santosh Singh, Advocate. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State. ASI Hawa Singh, PS Nihal Vihar. JUDGMENT0901.2019 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.461/2017 under SectionsIPC and Section 12, POCSO Act, Police Station Nihal Vihar.2. Allegations against the petitioner are that the petitioner had misbehaved with the prosecutrix, who is aged 15 years. It is alleged that he had undressed himself as well as the prosecutrix and when she shouted, neighbours came and he was apprehended.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that the prosecutrix in her evidence before the Trial Court has not supported the ...
Tag this Judgment!Mic Electronics Ltd. & Ors. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
* + + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 09, 2019 CRL.M.C. 3986/2017, CRL.M.A. 16082/2017 CRL.M.C. 4146/2017, CRL.M.A. 16657/2017 CRL.M.C. 4151/2017, CRL.M.A. 16674/2017 CRL.M.C. 5243/2017 MIC ELECTRONICS LTD & ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Vikas Gupta and Mr. Vipin Kalra, Advocates versus STATE & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.S. Oberoi, Additional Public Prosecutor for State Mr. Sarul Jain, Advocate for Respondent No.2 in CRL.M.C. 4146/2017 & in CRL.M.C. 5243/2017 Mr. Satinder Singh Mathur, Advocate for Respondent No.2 in CRL.M.C. 3986/2017 and CRL.M.C. 4151/2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Amended memo of parties of 9th January, 2019 has been filed in Crl.M.C. 4146/2017 in the Court and is taken on record. CRL.M.C. 3986/2017 & connected matters Page 1 of 4 With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the above captioned four petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. In th...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India & Anr. Vs.sanjay Gupta
Court: Delhi
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C.) No.9908/2017 Date of Decision:09. 01.2019 UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Dr. Ashwani Bhardwaj and Mr. Vinay S. Bhardwaj, Advs. SANJAY GUPTA versus Through: Respondent in person. .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.CHAWLA A.K.CHAWLA, J.(ORAL) Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking issuance of a 1. writ of certiorari quashing the judgment dated 13.07.2016 passed in OA No.3948/2014 and order dated 22.08.2017 passed in RA No.189/2017.2. Concisely, the relevant facts are that the respondent, who is an officer of Indian Telecom Service and joined as Asstt. Executive Engineer, had achieved the post of Supdt. Engineer, when he came to be posted with BSNL, Vijayawada on 07.12.2004. For the absorption of Group 'A' Officers in BSNL/MTNL the options were invited in the years 2005, 2008 and 2011. Respondent however did not opt for it. Thus, the respondent c...
Tag this Judgment!N Srinivasa Rao vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
* + + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 09, 2019 CRL.M.C. 3982/2017 & CRL.M.A. 16054/2017 CRL.M.C. 4091/2017 & CRL.M.A. 16421/2017 CRL.M.C. 4200/2017 & CRL.M.As. 16854-55/2017 CRL.M.C. 4226/2017 & CRL.M.As. 16943-44/2017 SH SOMENDRA KHOSLA N SRINIVASA RAO .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Vikas Gupta and Mr. Vipin Kalra, Advocates Versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.P. Singh and Mr. M.S.Oberoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutors for respondent- State Mr. Satinder Singh Mathur, Advocate for respondent No.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) The above captioned four petitions are directed against criminal 1. complaint titled JBB Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. MIC Electronics Limited and Ors, filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in which petitioners have been summoned as an accused. Quashing of aforesaid complaints and the summoning order of 16th 2. August, 2016 is sought on the ground that petitioners a...
Tag this Judgment!Yogesh Chandra Goyal & Anr. Vs.m/s Glory Apartment Pvt Ltd & Ors
Court: Delhi
$~8 & 9 (common order) IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"9 January, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 4003/2016 and Crl.M.A.16758/2016 + YOGESH CHANDRA GOYAL & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Purvesh Buttan, Advocate with Mr. Fahad Imtiaz, Advocate KAMLESH KUMAR GOEL & ORS versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja, Advocate with Mr. Sambit Nanda, & Mr. Akshit Kapur, Advocates CRL.M.C. 4013/2016 and Crl.M.A.16790-16791/2016 YOGESH CHANDRA GOYAL & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Purvesh Buttan, Advocate with Mr. Fahad Imtiaz, Advocate versus M/S GLORY APARTMENT PVT LTD & ORS....... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja, Advocate with Mr. Sambit Nanda, & Mr. Akshit Kapur, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioners had instituted criminal complaint (No.14of 2012) alleging offences punishable under Sections 630 of the Crl. M.C. No.4003/2016 & 4013/2016 Page 1 of 14 Companies Act, 1956 and Sections 406/408/441 of Indian Penal Code,...
Tag this Judgment!Renuka (Sengupta) Malaker & Ors. Vs.office of the Appropriate Authorit ...
Court: Delhi
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 37/2019 & C.M. APPL. 206/2019 RENUKA (SENGUPTA) MALAKER & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate. versus OFFICE OF THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY AND ORS. Through: Mr R. Mishra and Mr M. K. ........ RESPONDENTS Tiwari, Advocates for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER0701.2019 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the CBDTs instructions dated 19.07.1993. The petitioner further prays that directions be issued to the respondents to permit the petitioner to negotiate and acquire the property bearing address A-3/4, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi (hereafter referred to as the said property). In the alternative, the petitioner prays that directions be issued to the respondents for immediately auctioning the said property.2. The petitioner also claims compensation at the rate of 1.5 lacs per month with effect from 01.01.2016 till, the finalisation and disposal of the sa...
Tag this Judgment!Kamal Construction Co. Vs.d.d.A
Court: Delhi
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.181/2007 9th January, 2019 KAMAL CONSTRUCTION CO. D.D.A ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Dhiraj Sachdeva, Advocate. versus (9818114050) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Standing counsel for DDA and Ms. Gauri Chaturvedi, Advocate (9810272270) CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the plaintiff in the suit impugning the Judgment of the trial court dated 04.12.2006 to the extent whereby the trial court has denied the watch and ward charges as claimed by the appellant/plaintiff, and which was the subject matter of Issue No.11 in the suit. RFA No.181/2007 Page 1 of 6 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff had filed the subject suit seeking recovery of the principal amount of Rs. 11,78,532/- alongwith interest of Rs. 5,35,649/- totaling to Rs. 1...
Tag this Judgment!