Delhi Court August 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.
Kamlesh Devi & Ors. Vs.munesh Parihar & Ors. (National Insurance Co. L ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2019
$~5 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:21. 08.2019 MAC.APP. 20/2018 KAMLESH DEVI & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. S. N. Parashar, Advocate. Versus MUNESH PARIHAR & ORS (NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD ) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Manu Shahalia, Advocate for Respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(Oral) 1. This appeal impugns the order of the learned MACT dated 21.07.2017 passed in MACT Case No.dismissing the appellants claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.2. It is the appellants case that the impugned order has erred in not taking cognizance of the FIR which was on the record and it was registered upon a complaint made by Constable Satish Kumar (PW2), who was an eye- witness to the accident. Therefore, the conclusion in the impugned order in paras 10 and 11 is erroneous on the face of the record. The order records, inter-alia, that none of the documents even like FIR, chargsheet, MAC.APP. No.20 -2018 P...
Lekhraj vs.the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on:12. h July, 2019 Judgment Pronounced on:21. t August, 2019 CRL.A.16/2002 Lekhraj The State Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Versus ..... Appellant ..... Respondent Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr.Sidhant Kumar, Advocate with Appellant. Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the State : For the Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI JUDGMENT BRIJESH SETHI, J1 The appellant has instituted the present appeal under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C) against the impugned judgment dated 23.08.2001 and order on sentence dated 24.08.2001, in Session Case No.22/2001, arising out of FIR No.485/1996, registered at Police StationNangloi; whereby the Trial Court has convicted the CRL.A.16/2002 Page 1 of 45 accused Lekhraj (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) of a charge framed against him under section 30...
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi-21 vs.lalit Bagai
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2019
$~38 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA14442018 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-21..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ajit Sharma, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms.Adiba Mujahid and Ms.Priya Sarkar, Advocates. versus LALIT BAGAI Through: Mr.Gagan Kumar with Mr.Amit Kaushik, Advocates. ..... Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH % ORDER2108.2019 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. The Revenue is in appeal against an order dated 9th March 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No.5833/Del/2015 for Assessment Year (AY) 2006-07.2. The issue sought to be urged by the Revenue is whether the ITAT was justified in quashing the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act on the ground of change of opinion on the applicability of Section 40 (a) (ia) of the Act even when the Assessing Officer (AO) had not expressed any opinion on the applicability of such provision during the original ITA14442018 Page 1 of 10 assessment proceedings under Section...
Ratul Puri vs.directorate of Enforcement Government of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: August 09, 2019 Pronounced on: August 21, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 3945/2019 & CRL.M.A. 33252/2019 RATUL PURI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, Ms. Barkha Rastogi, Ms. Shephalie Ahlawat, Ms. Shakshi Pandey & Mr. Shekhar, Advocates. Versus DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. D.P. Singh, Special Public Prosecutor with Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Mr. B. Naveen Kumar, Mr. Manu Mishra & Ms. Mallika, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Impugned order of 6th August, 2019, declines to supply petitioners ORDER statement recorded under Section 50(2) of The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that bare reading of Section 50 (2) of The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 reveals that the proceedings conducted under aforesaid provision are of civil CRL.M.C. 3945/2019 Page 1 of 3 nature and these proceedings are infact judicial proceed...
Mukesh Kumar Sharma vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2019
$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. 08.2019 + W.P.(C) 8955/2019 & CM APPL. 36957/2019 1. MUKESH KUMAR SHARMA ........ Petitioner Through Mr.V.K. Garg, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Amit Kumar & Ms.Noopur Dubey, Advs. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr.Ramesh Singh, Standing counsel with Mr.Ankur Chhibber, Mr.Chirayu Jain, Mr.Bhanu & Mr.Ishan Agrawal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT (ORAL) Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby declaring the action of respondents in passing an order of suspension dated 01.08.2019 as illegal, bad in law and accordingly quash and set aside the impugned inquiry reports dated 17.10.2018, 20.12.2018, order dated 28.02.2019 of 15th Governing Council and order dated 14.06.2019 of 16th Governing Council. W.P.(C) 8955/2019 Page 1 of 12 2. Further seeks direction thereby to declare that the... Petitioner meets the eligibility criteria as prescribed in advert...
Ct/Gd Ram Krushna Sahu vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~3 * + Date of Decision:21. 08.2019 % W.P.(C.) No.4309/2019 CT/GD RAM KRUSHNA SAHU ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. N.L. Bareja, Advocate Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. B.N.P. Pathak, Sr. CGSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J.(ORAL) W.P.(C) No.4309/2019 1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner, inter alia, with the following prayers: a) Issue an appropriate writ, order(s) or direction(s) in the nature of certiorari setting aside / quashing the impugned letter dated 07.02.2019 passed by the respondent No.2, and the orders dated 14.01.2000 R/w order dated 12.07.2000, 12.11.2017 passed by the respondent No.3 and the order dated 01.03.2018 passed by the respondent No.4. W.P.(C.) No.4309/2019 Page 1 of 6 Direct to extend all the respondents b) the consequential benefits to include fixation of his...
Coal India Limited vs.m/s. Vidarbha Industries Power Limited & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2019
$~ * % + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI LPA1692018 Judgment reserved on :22. 05.2019 Judgment pronounced on :21. .08.2019 COAL INDIA LIMITED ..... Appellant versus M/S. VIDARBHA INDUSTRIES POWER LIMITED & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS LPA1732018 UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant versus M/S. VIDARBHA INDUSTRIES POWER LIMITED & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Present : Mr. Jagdeep Dhankar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Karan Singh Bhati, Mr. Hemedra Sharma & Mr. Kartikeya Vajpai, Advocates for Coal India Limited. Ms. Maninder Acharya, ASG with Mr. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC, Mr. Waize Ali Noor, Mr.Sahil Sood, Ms.Shruti Dutt, Mr.Harshul Chaudhary, Mr.Pradeep Dhanda and Mr.Viplav Acharya, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Akhil Sibal, Sr. Advocate with Ms.Aanchal Mullick, Mr. Pradeep Chhindra & Mr. Parinay Vasandani, Advocates for VIPL. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH LPA Nos.169/2018 & 173/2018 Page 1 of 32 JYOTI SINGH, J.1. Since both these appeals have been filed challengin...
Riyaz Khan @ Gainda vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~4 * + W.P.(CRL) 1709/2019 & Crl.M.A.No.12368/2019 RIYAZ KHAN @ GAINDA ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Harsh Prabhakar, Advocate (DHCLSC). STATE versus ..... Respondent Through Ms.Kamani Vora, ASC for the State with SI Vikram Singh, PS ODRS. % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL Date of Decision:21. t August, 2019 JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present writ of habeas corpus has been filed seeking directions to the respondent to release the petitioner as he was a juvenile on the date of incident/registration of FIR No.141/2008 registered with PS Old Delhi Railway Station (ODRS), under Sections 302/307/394/3IPC.2. The petitioner was convicted by the Trial Court and the judgment of the Trial Court was upheld by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 31st October, 2014 passed in Crl.A.No.299/2012. W.P.(Crl) 1709/2019 Page 1 of 3 3. It is pertinent to mention that no documentary evidence has be...
Bhushan Kumar vs.state (Gnct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2019
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:21. 08.2019 BAIL APPLN. 899/2019 BHUSHAN KUMAR versus STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent: Mr. Deepak Singh, Adv. Mr. Hirein Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with SI Juli Mr. Avinash, Adv. for complainant CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks Anticipatory bail in FIR No.2/2019 under Sections 354/354A/354B/3IPC, Police Station Gandhi Nagar.2. Allegations against the petitioner by the prosecutrix are that she is an owner of a particular shop and there is a dispute with the brother of the petitioner the co-accused. She got information that some person had come to break open the lock of her shop. When she reached the spot, she found the petitioner there along with his brother with tools for breaking the lock and when she objected, it is alleged BAIL APPLN....
Cholamandalam Ms Gen Insurance Co Ltd. Vs.sarika & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~17 * % + MAC.APP. 1048/2018, CAV10882018 & CM APPL. 49209/2018 Decided on:21. 08.2019 CHOLAMANDALAM MS GEN INSURANCE CO LTD... Appellant Through: Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate. versus SARIKA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. S. N. Parashar, Advocate for R-1 to 5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(Oral) CAV10882018 1. Since the learned counsel for the caveators enters appearance, the caveat stands discharged. MAC.APP. 1048/2018 & CM APPL. 49209/2018 2. The appeal has impugned the award of compensation dated 29.08.2018 in MAC. APP. 352/2017, on the sole ground that the rate of minimum wage at which the compensation was calculated, as notified by the GNCTD i.e. Rs. 13,350/- per month, has been struck down by a Division Bench of this Court vide its order dated 04.08.2018. In effect, the minimum wage applicable would be Rs. 9,724/- per month. However, much has MAC.APP. No.1048/2018 Page 1 of 2 transpired since then, the cas...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »