Delhi Court February 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.
Naim Ahmed vs.the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 04, 2019 BAIL APPLN. 125/2019 NAIM AHMED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Krishna Kumar, Ms. Sunita Versus Arora and Mr. RCS Bhadoria, Advocates THE STATE Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State with ASI Data Ram .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL)... Petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in FIR No.7under Sections 420/468/471 of IPC registered at Police Station Seelampur, Delhi. While entertaining this application, petitioner was directed to join the investigation and interim protection from arrest was granted to him, vide order of 18th January, 2019. Status report has been handed over by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State and it is taken on record. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits that petitioner has joined the investigation. Without commenting upon merits of this case, interim order of 18th January, 20...
Trustline Securities Ltd vs.skylark Express (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2019
* + % TRUSTLINE SECURITIES LTD. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.90/2019 4th February, 2019 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sumit Kalra, Advocate (Mobile No.9873353654). versus SKYLARK EXPRESS (DELHI) PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. No.5045-46/2019 (for exemptions) 1. Exemptions allowed, subject to just exceptions. C.Ms. stand disposed of. RFA No.90/2019 and C.M. Appl. No.5047/2019 (for stay) 2. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant in the suit RFA No.90/2019 Page 1 of 9 impugning the Judgment of the trial court dated 31.10.2018 whereby the trial court has decreed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff, courier company, for balance due payable by the appellant/defendant company, and this balance was due against the appellant/defendant and in favour of the respondent/plaintiff on account ...
Bal Bharati Public School vs.directorate of Education
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:14. h January, 2019 Pronounced on:4. h February, 2019 + W.P.(C) 7902/2018 & CM No.30296/2018 % 1. BAL BHARATI PUBLIC SCHOOL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv.with Mr. Kamal Gupta and Ms. Pragya Agrawal, Advs. versus DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ramesh SC- GNCTD with Mr. Chirayu Jain and Ms. Nikita Goyal, Advs. Singh, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT The petitioner is a private unaided recognised senior secondary school, which was granted permanent recognition, by the Directorate of Education (hereinafter referred to as the DOE), in 1973. The lease deeds, whereby land was allotted, by the Land and Development Office (L&DO) for construction of the petitioners school, issued in 1955, 1963, 1965, 1974 and 1975 did not contain any stipulation to the effect that, before or after increasing its tuition fee, the school was required to take approval, for the said increase, fr...
Ram Chander Kasania and Anr. Vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2019
$~4 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 695/2019 & CM Appl.No.3038/2019 RAM CHANDER KASANIA AND ANR. Through Mr. Ankur Chibber, Advocate. ........ Petitioners versus CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Akshay Makhija, CGSC with Mr. Kavindra Gill & Mr. Aditya Goyal, Advocates for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. ORDER0402.2019 % 1. The prayers in the present petition are similar to the prayers in WP(C) No.1951/2012 and batch matters i.e. Dev Sharma v. ITBP which was decided by this Court on 31st January, 2019. By the said judgment this Court declared Rule 43 of the CRPF Rules, 1955 and other incidental Rules to the extent they provided that a member of the Central and Allied Police Forces (CAPFs) including the ITBP, the BSF and the CRPF up to the rank of Commandant would retire at 57 years to be discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.2. Further, this Court has in Dev Sharma v. ...
M/S Icici Bank Ltd. Vs.mohammad Gazan Ali
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2019
$~1 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO4502018 M/S ICICI BANK LTD. .... Appellant Through Mr.Punit K. Bhalla, Adv. versus MOHAMMAD GAZAN ALI Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL % ORDER0402.2019 CM No.39994/2018 (for exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. FAO4502018 2. The impugned order dated 31.08.2018 passed by the court of learned Additional District Judge-12, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (ADJ) in CS No.59titled as ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. Md. Gazan Ali declining the prayer of the appellant/plaintiff for appointment of an ex-parte receiver, is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal.3. The facts of the case as noticed by the learned ADJ in the impugned order are that Brief facts of the case as stated in the FAO4502018 Page 1 of 5 application are that applicant has provide a loan of Rs.6,75,783/- to the defendant for purchase of the vehicle i.e. car make HONDA AMAZE/SMT bearing registration No.DL14 CC8190vi...
Dhian Nath Kapur vs.pran Nath Kapur
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :2. d November, 2018 Date of decision :4. h February, 2019 CS(OS) 2746/2014 & I.A. 9466/2015, 11813/2017 & 2287/2018 DHIAN NATH KAPUR ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Alok K. Aggarwal and Mr. Advocates. Rastogi, Apoorv (M:9899068509) versus PRAN NATH KAPUR ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Advocate for LRs with Ms. Meera Bajaj/LR1 in person. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.JUDGMENT1 Late Shri Dina Nath Kapur was the owner of property bearing No.14, Park Area, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 (hereinafter Suit Property). He had two sons, the Plaintiff- Shri Dhian Nath Kapur and the Defendant - Shri Pran Nath Kapur (hereinafter, Pran Nath Kapur). The property is a rectangular plot 170.4 feet long and 69.8 feet wide. Shri Dina Nath Kapur passed away on 20th March, 1978. He had executed a registered Will dated 15th May, 1965, registered on 29th May, 1965. There is no dispute between the parties that each of ...
Raj Kumar & Ors. Vs.the State of Nct of Delhi & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 04, 2019 CRL.M.C. 602/2019 RAJ KUMAR & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Vikram Singh Bhatia and Mr. Munni Lal, Advocates Versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Mohd. Faizan Ghani Mr. C.M. Grover, Advocate with Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.92/2003, under Section 498-A/4of IPC, registered at police station Pandav Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 31st August, 2018 (Annexure P-V). Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court is the complainant/first informant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by SI Mohd. Faizan Ghani on the basis of identity proof produced by her. Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between th...
Commissioner of Police and Ors. Vs.shri Kapil Kumar Meena
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:04. 02.2019 $~14. * + % W.P.(C.) No.10772/2017 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Satyakam, Additional Standing Counsel along with HC Rakesh Kumar. versus SHRI KAPIL KUMAR MEENA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja & Mr. Sambit Nanda, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. CHAWLA VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) 1. The Commissioner of Police has preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 13.12.2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT/ Tribunal) in O.A. No.2705/2011. The Tribunal has allowed the said Original Application preferred by the respondent; quashed the orders impugned before it by the respondent; and directed grant of consequential benefits to the respondent. However, it was held that the respondent would not be entitled to any arrears of pay.2. The respondent was appointed as a Constable (Driver) with the Delhi W.P.(C.) No.10...
Bhuvnesh Prakash Sharma vs.state (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 04, 2019 CRL.REV.P. 1137/2018 and Crl.M.A. 49709/2018 BHUVNESH PRAKASH SHARMA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate Versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Impugned order of 22nd October, 2018 declines petitioners application for getting Suraj Mal and Dimple Ahuja summoned in defence. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that name of Suraj Mal is very much mentioned in the suicide note and the evidence of Dimple Ahuja is necessary to prove the financial transaction which has an important bearing on the facts of instant case. It is also stated that the case is pending before trial court for recording of evidence. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State supports the impugned order. Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order, I find that if petitioner i...
Ahmad Hussain & Ors. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 04, 2019 CRL.M.C. 593/2019 AHMAD HUSSAIN & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Akash Verma and Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocates Versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Madan Lal Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Crl.M.A. 2481/2019 (delay) There is delay of 36 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. 593/2019 Quashing of FIR No.220/2013, under Section 498-A/406/5of IPC, registered at police station Dabri, Delhi is sought on the basis of Settlement of 25th October, 2017 (Annexure P-2). Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court is the CRL. M.C. 593/2019 Page 1 of 4 complainant/first informant of FIR in questio...
- ‹ Prev
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- Next ›
- Last »