Delhi Court October 2019 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.
The Govt. Of Nct of Delhi and Ors vs.kamlesh Rani Bhatla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-09-2019
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(C) 1118/2019 Date of Judgment :09. h October, 2019 THE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan, ASC with Mr. Zahid Hanief, Advocate versus KAMLESH RANI BHATLA ..... Respondent Through Mr. M.S. Saini, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present writ petition is directed against an order dated 20.03.2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal).2. In this case, the respondent herein was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 27.03.1997. On 22.03.2012, the respondent tendered her request for technical resignation. The petitioners acceded to the request of the respondent and accepted the resignation on 29.03.2012 w.e.f. 22.03.2012.3. The respondent subsequently moved an application on 21.04.2012 requesting the D.D.E., South Zone-23 to allow her to withdraw her resignation and permit her to rej...
M/S d.a.v. Senior Secondary School vs.ms. Ganga Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-01-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision :-"01.10.2019 + W.P.(C) 1643/2017 M/S D.A.V. SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL Through: Mr. Mahesh Srivastava, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus MS. GANGA DEVI Through: Mr.P.N. Dwivedi, Adv. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL) 1. The present writ petition has been preferred by the management/DAV School assailing the Award dated 17.10.2015 passed by the learned Labour Court-XVII, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in ID No.55/12/12. Under the impugned Award, the learned Labour Court after holding that the respondents services were illegally terminated in violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on 14.07.2011, had directed the petitioner to pay a lumpsum compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- to the respondent. The Labour Court has further directed that in case the aforesaid compensation is not paid within one month from the date of publication, the same would carry an interest @ 9% p.a.2. Lear...
Vivek Bindra vs.geetika Bindra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-01-2019
$~19 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 514/2019 VIVEK BINDRA ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Dinesh Rastogi, Mr. Gaurav Puri & Mr. Sarthak Gupta, Advs. Versus ..... Defendant Through: None. GEETIKA BINDRA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW % ORDER0110.2019 IA No.13849/2019 (for exemption) 1.2. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. The application is disposed of. CS(OS) 514/2019 & IA No.13848/2019 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) 3. The plaintiff has sued his wife, for (i) declaration that the plaintiff is the sole and absolute owner of property No.D-6/8, Okhla Block-D, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi-110020; (ii) mandatory injunction directing the defendant to handover the original Sale Deed of the said property; and (iii) permanent injunction restraining the defendant from parting with possession of the Sale Deed or creating any third party interest in the property.4. The plaintiff, in the plaint itself has admitted that as p...
Vikas Sharma & Anr. Vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-01-2019
$~59 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 4855/2019 Date of decision:01.10.2019 VIKAS SHARMA & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. for Mr. Sunil versus Mund, Adv. STATE & ANR Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, APP for State ........ RESPONDENTS SI Sumitra Sharma/IO Ms. Meeta Bali Sehrawat and Mr. Rajesh Sehrawat, Advs. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Vide the present petition, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.487/2015 dated 12.04.2015 registered at Police Station Rajouri Garden and consequent proceedings arising therefrom.2. Notice issued.3. Notice is accepted by learned APP for the State and counsel for the respondent no.2.4. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the present petition is taken up for final disposal. CRL.M.C.4855/2019 Page 1 of 3 5. The petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 got married on 28.10.2009 as per Hindu rites and rituals. One child was born out of the wedlock, namely, Kamakshi S...
Mohd. Shahid & Ors. Vs.qureshia Begam
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-01-2019
$~36 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:01. 10.2019 RC.REV. 603/2016 & CM APPL. 21948/2017 & 23011/2017 & 28644/2017 MOHD SHAHID & ORS. versus QURESHIA BEGAM ........ Petitioners ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr. R.L. Kohli, Advocate For the Respondent: Ms. Deepika V. Marwaha, Ms. Worthing Kasar, Mr. Alok Pandey and Ms. Paunika Johar, Advocates for R-1(a) & (b) Mr. Lalit Gupta and Mr. Himank Ahuja, Advocate for R-1 (e) CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner impugns order dated 23.08.2016, whereby the Leave to defend application of the petitioner has been dismissed by the Rent Controller and an eviction order passed.2. Respondent had filed the subject eviction petition seeking RC.REV.603/2016 Page 1 of 3 eviction of the petitioner on the ground of bonafide necessity under Section 14(1) (e) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 from one room/store on the grou...
d.t.c. Vs.dilpat Singh Ex-Driver
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-01-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 634/2006 & CM No.11629/2007 Date of Decision :-"01.10.2019 D.T.C. Through: Ms. Manisha Tyagi, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus DILPAT SINGH EX-DRIVER ..... Respondent Through: Mr. N.S. Dalal, Mr. Manu Kharra and Ms.T. Banerjee, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL) 1. The present writ petition has been preferred by the management/DTC assailing the Award dated 02.08.2005 passed by the learned Labour Court-II, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in ID No.282/2001. Under the impugned Award the Labour Court, after finding that the petitioners application for approval under Section 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act for short) stood rejected, had come to the conclusion that in view of the settled legal position as laid down in Jaipur Zila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Ltd. vs. Ram Gopal Verma (2002) 2 SCC244 the respondent was deemed to have been in continued service. The petitioner was, therefore, directe...
Pawan Kamra vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-01-2019
$~36 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2830/2019 & CRL M.A. 37490/2019 & Crl. M.A. 37491/2019 PAWAN KAMRA ........ Petitioner STATE Through Mr. Pritish Sabharwal, Adv. versus ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sanjay Lao, Ld. ASC. Insp. Arun Chauhan-Anti Corruption Branch, GNCT of Delhi CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI BRIJESH SETHI, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. 37491/2019(Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. JUDGMENT Application stands disposed of. W.P.(CRL) 2830/2019 & CRL M.A. 37490/2019.1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner Pawan Kamra challenging the Order dated 26.09.2019 passed by Mr. Sanjay WP(Crl.) 2830/2019 Page 1 of 4 Khanagwal, Ld. Special Judge, PC Act-02/ACB, Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi 2. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Ld. Sessions Judge has initiated the proceedings under Section 83 of the code of Criminal Procedure and has directed attachment of the movable and immovable property of the petitioner where...
Omesh vs.registrar General, Delhi High Court & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-01-2019
$~24, 25, 29, 34, 35 and 41 * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 10592/2019 NISHANT BASOYA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Sagar S.Jaiswal with Mr.Nivesh Sharma, Mr.Kirti Gupta and Ms.Ritu Singh, Advocates. versus REGISTRAR GENERAL, THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Rajshekhar Rao with Mr.Ankit Jain, Mr.Chaitanya Puri, Mr.Siddhant Nath, Mr.Abhay Pratap Singh, Mr.Areeb Y.Amanullah, Mr.Siddharth Raval and Ms.Rajshree Jaiswal, Advocates for Delhi High Court. W.P.(C) 10692/2019 ANU KUMARI AND ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Prashant Manchanda with Mr.Mohit Saroha, Mr.Mohit Siwach and Mr.Rakshit Pandey, Advocates along with... Petitioners in person . versus REGISTRAR GENERAL DELHI HIGH COURT .... Respondent Through: Mr.Rajshekhar Rao with Mr. Ankit Jain, Mr.Chaitanya Puri, Mr.Siddhant Nath, Mr.Abhay Pratap Singh, Mr.Areeb Y.Amanullah, Mr.Siddharth Raval and Ms.Rajshree Jaiswal, Advocates for Delhi High W.P.(C) 10592/2019 and connected matters Page 1...
Sh. Nitesh Kumar & Ors. Vs.the State & Nct of Delhi & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-01-2019
$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:01. 10.2019. + CRL.M.C. 5045/2019 SH. NITESH KUMAR & ORS. Through: Mr. O. S. Sheoran, Adv. ........ Petitioners versus The STATE & NCT of Delhi & ANR. Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmdd, APP for State ........ RESPONDENTS SI Sanjeet Singh, PS Rajouri Garden Mr.Vikas K. Agarwal and Mr. Arun Sharma, Advs. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT (ORAL) Crl.M.A. 37473/2019 (Exemption) 1.2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application is, accordingly, disposed of. CRL.M.C. 5045/2019 3. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.921/2016 dated 17.12.2016, registered at Police Station Rajouri Garden and consequent proceedings arising therefrom.4. Notice issued. CRL.M.C. 5045/2019 Page 1 of 3 5. Notice is accepted by learned APP for the State and counsel for the respondent no.2 and with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the present petition is taken up for final disposal.6...
Mohd. Akram & Anr. Vs.safdar Ali & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-01-2019
$~46 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + RC.REV. 584/2019 Judgment delivered on:01. 10.2019 MOHD AKRAM & ANR versus SAFDAR ALI & ANR ........ Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr.Sanat Kumar, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Yogesh Chandna, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr.A.Maitri and Ms.Radhika Chandrashekhar, Advocates. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) CM APPL.44371/2019 (exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM APPL.44373/2019 (condonation of delay) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application was filed under a bonafide mistake that the limitation period for filing the revision petition is 90 days. He submits that the rent revisions are covered under Article 137 of the Limitation Act for which the limitation would be three years. RC.REV. 584/2019 Page 1 of 3 He seeks leave to withdraw the application. Application is dismissed as withdrawn. RC.REV. 5...
- ‹ Prev
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- Next ›
- Last »