Delhi Court May 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.
Abhay Sharma vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-07-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 2470/2019 ABHAY SHARMA Date of Order: May 07, 2019 .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Manish Jauhari, Advocate versus STATE & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Yashdeep Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) CRL.M.A.9780/2019 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 2470/2019 Quashing of FIR No.716/2016, under Sections 498-A/4of IPC, registered at Police Station Mehrauli, Delhi is sought on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding (Annexure P-2 colly) of 12th October, 2016. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-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 Yashdeep on the basis of identity proof CRL.M.C. 2470/2019 Page 1 of 3 produced by her. Respondent No.2, present in the ...
Jai Dev & Anr vs.jai Bala Mittal & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-07-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:7. h May, 2019 EX.P. 42/2019, EA No.219/2019 (u/O XX R-6A CPC) & EA No.220/2019 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) JAI DEV & ANR. ..... Decree Holders Through: Mr. Abhishek Aggarwal, Adv. Versus ..... Judgement Debtors Through: None. JAI BALA MITTAL & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW EA No.221/2019 (for exemption) 1.2. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. The application is disposed of. EX.P. 42/2019 3. Execution is sought of a decree in terms of order dated 14th September, 2018 in Test Case No.66/2016.4. Ordinarily, in a Test Case, either an order of dismissal of the case or of allowing the case and granting letters of administration / probate can be made. However, as per the dicta of the Division Bench of this Court in B.S. Oberoi Vs. P.S. Oberoi 2013 SCC OnLine Del 616, and the dicta of Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in Harinder Singh Kochar Vs. State (2010) 173 DLT365and Ambica Mengi Vs. State MANU/DE/4557/2015,...
Netplus Broadband Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs.cisco Systems Capital (India) ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-07-2019
$~1 * % + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:7. 5.2019 ARB.P. 704/2018 NETPLUS BROADBAND SERVICES PVT. LTD......... Petitioner Through: Ms. Meneesha Dhir with Mr. Karan versus Batura, Advs. Through: Mr. Punit K. Bhalla, Adv. CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) This is a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter referred to as 1996 Act). The relief sought for by the petitioner is that an arbitrator be appointed since the respondent has failed to appoint an arbitrator despite a notice being served in that behalf on the respondent.2. Concededly, the petitioner had invoked the arbitration agreement, which obtains in Clause 12.7 of the Master Lease and Financing Agreement dated 11.9.2015 (in short Master Agreement) obtaining between the parties. Admittedly, Clause 12.7, which stands incorporated in the agreement gives respondent the r...
Raj Kumar @ Raju vs.state of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-06-2019
$~R-6 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:06. 05.2019 % CRL.A.98/2010 RAJ KUMAR @ RAJU ..Appellant Through: Mr. Advocate. Abhishek Sabharwal, versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..Respondent Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.CHAWLA A.K. CHAWLA, J.(ORAL) By the instant appeal, the appellant assails the judgment dated 1. 12.12.2009 and the order on sentence dated 06.01.2010 passed by the ld. ASJ on the trial of the offence under Section 307 IPC.2. Concisely, the undisputed facts are that the appellant was married to PW-1 Ms.Sheetal in the year 2005 and on account of matrimonial discord, PW-1 started living separately, with her mother PW-2 Ms. Nisha. As the prosecutions case goes, on 12.09.2006 at about 11.30 a.m., when PW-1 and CRL.A.98/2010 Page 1 of 5 PW-2 were going for work and reached Pusa Gate Red Light, the appellant assaulted them with a razor. Multiple clean wound injuries by PW-1 and few clean wound injuries by PW-2 ...
Rajan Bery vs.state (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-06-2019
$~ * % + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI TEST.CAS. 67/2011 Date of Decision:06. h May, 2019 ........ Petitioner Narayan, Ms.Neha Ms.Veena Dawal, ..... Respondent RAJAN BERY Through: Ms.Mala Goshwami, Advocates. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT The petitioner is seeking letters of administration with Will annexed in respect of the Will dated 16th September, 2003 of his father, late Baikunth Nath Bery.2. Late Baikunth Nath Bery expired on 13th November, 2006. Late Baikunth Nath Bery had two sons namely Rajan Bery (petitioner) and Rajiv Bery; and three daughters, namely Lata Sarin (respondent No.2), Rita Kohli (respondent No.3) and Pramila Wahi. Pramila Wahi expired on 25th December, 2001 and was survived by her husband, Ashok Wahi (respondent No.4) and three sons, namely Dhruv Wahi (respondent No.5), Ankush Wahi (respondent No.6) and Anuj Wahi (respondent No.7). TEST.CAS. 67/2011 Page 1 of 5 3. Rajiv Bery, son of the ...
Sh. Ankur Gupta vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-06-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 158/2019 SH. ANKUR GUPTA Date of Order: May 06, 2019 .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Yadav and Mr. Ankur Gupta, Advocates STATE & ANR Versus Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional .....Respondents Public Prosecutor for respondent- State with ASI Praveen Kumar Ms. Payal Aggarwal and Mr. Navneet, Singh, Advocates with respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.140/2016, under Sections 406/498-A/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Nanak Pura, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit 9th January, 2019 of respondent No.2. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-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 ASI Praveen Kumar on the basis of identity proof produced by her. Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the...
Laxmi Devi vs.the Chairman Delhi Development Authority & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-06-2019
$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:6. h May, 2019 + W.P.(C) 1124/2014 LAXMI DEVI ......... Petitioner Through : Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena, Adv. versus THE CHAIRMAN DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. ......... RESPONDENTS Through : Ms. Urvi Kuthiala, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR % JUDGMNET (ORAL) 06.05.2019 1. Mani Ram Silswal, the husband of the petitioner, applied, to the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), on 5th July, 1980, for allotment of a flat under the reserved quota maintained by the DDA for ex- service men. In the certificate of registration, issued to the petitioners husband by the DDA, his address was noted as E-46, Braham Puri, Delhi-110053. Additionally, in the deposit receipt, acknowledging receipt of payment of 1,500/- by the petitioners husband, towards the said application for allotment, his office address, i.e. Lodhi Road, H.P.O., New Delhi-110003, was also noted. The DDA was, therefore, in the know of both these addresses ...
Mohd. Arif & Ors vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-06-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: May 06, 2019 CRL.M.C. 2443/2019 & CRL.M.A. 9667/2019 MOHD. ARIF & ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Aditya Gaur, Advocate. Versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with ASI Rajesh Kumar. Mr. Shoaib Ahmad, Advocate with Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.103/2013, under Sections 498-A/4of IPC, registered at Police Station Moti Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis of settlement of 4th August, 2018 reached between the parties. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-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 ASI Rajesh Kumar, on the basis of identity proof produced by her. Crl.M.C. 2443/2019 Page 1 of 3 Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between ...
Parsvnath Developers Limited vs.kiran Industries & Investment Company ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-06-2019
$~6 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 1779/2010 PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. KIRAN INDUSTRIES & INVESTMENT COMPANY & ANR versus ..... Defendants CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA Through: Mr. Sanjeev Mahajan, Advocate. % ORDER0605.2019 SANJEEV NARULA, J1 The Plaintiff by way of the present suit seeks joint and several decree against the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 2,51,000,00/- (Rupees Two Crores Fifty One Lakhs only) along with interest and damages. Case of the Plaintiff 2. The case of the Plaintiff, as stated in the plaint, is that (a) the Plaintiff is engaged, inter-alia, in the business of development of residential properties, commercial properties, townships, group housing projects and other related infrastructure facilities across India and holds an enviable reputation in its business with a valuable brand image; (b) the Defendant No.2, on behalf of CS(OS) 1779/2010 Page 1 of 23 the Defendant No.1...
Amar Kumar Pandey vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-06-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:10. h July, 2018 Decided on:6. h May, 2019 CRL.A. 230/2016 AMAR KUMAR PANDEY ..... Appellant STATE Represented by: Mr. Gautam Khazanchi with Mr. Udit Arora, Advocates ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP for the versus State CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Amar Kumar Pandey challenges the impugned judgment dated 27th August, 2015 convicting him for the offences punishable under SectionIPC and the order on sentence dated 11th September, 2015 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of eight years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable unde...
- ‹ Prev
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- Next ›
- Last »