Delhi Court September 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.
Harish Kumar Garg vs.dr. Amrit Lal Shukla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2019
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:18. 09.2019 RC.REV. 195/2017 & Crl. M.A. 15504/2017 HARISH KUMAR GARG versus DR AMRIT LAL SHUKLA ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr. Piyush Jain, Adv. with petitioner in person. For the Respondent: Mr. Satish Sahai, Adv. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner impugns order dated 26.12.2016, 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 eviction of the petitioner on the ground of bonafide necessity under Section 14(1) (e) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 from shop No.1 of property bearing 1372, Shastri Nagar, Delhi, more particularly as shown in red colour in the site plan attached to the eviction petition. RC.REV. 195/2017 Page 1 of 3 3. Learned counsel...
Sachin Jindal vs.state & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.REV.P. 960/2019, CRL.M.A. 35619/2019 (stay) and CRL.M.A. 35620/2019 (exemption) * Judgment Reserved :12. 09.2019 Date of Decision :18. 09.2019 IN THE MATTER OF SACHIN JINDAL STATE ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Harshit Jain, Adv. versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI State. By this revision petition, petitioner assails the order dated 1. 03.09.2019 passed by Additional Session Judge in SC No.58093/2016 arising out of FIR No.278/2014 registered under Sections 302/370/3IPC at P.S. Model Town, whereby his prayer seeking a copy of video cassette has been rejected.2. In the present case, the prosecution had examined Mr. Naresh Kumar Rana as PW3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has handed over a copy of the testimony of the said witness, which is taken on record. PW3 is a Videographer by profession. He had done the videography in respect of the post-mortem examination conducte...
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co Ltd. Vs.dinesh & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2019
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + MAC.APP. 914/2017 & CM APPL. 37729/2017 Decided on:18. 09.2019 ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURACE CO LTD Through: Ms. Summan Bagga and Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocates. ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS versus Through: DINESH & ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(Oral) 1. This appeal impugns the award of compensation dated 17.07.2017 passed by the learned MACT in MACP No.4578/2016 (Old No.551/13) on the ground that the deceased, who was a housewife, had claimed to be earning Rs. 10,000/- through knitting and stitching work. However, since the claimants were unable to substantiate the said claim, she being a matriculate, the minimum wage applicable to a matriculate was taken into consideration. There was an addition of 25% towards loss of future prospects albeit it should have been 40% in terms of dicta of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors., (2017) 16 SCC680 [ para 61 (iv)].. MAC...
Varunarjun Trust & Anr vs.union of India & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2019
$~77 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:18. 09.2019 LPA6102019 VARUNARJUN TRUST & ANR ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Abdhesh Chaudhary, Ms. Sakshi Arora, Ms. Aparna Bhardwaj & Mr. Manav Sharma, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Abhay Prakash Sahay, CGSC with Mr. Syed Husain Adil Taqvi, G.P. & Mr.Anshu Kr. Yadav, Adv. for R-1 Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. T. Singhdev, Ms. Puja Sarkar, Ms. Michelle B. Das, Ms.Arunima Pal, Ms. Sumangla & Ms.Manpreet Kaur Bhasin, Advs. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL) CM APPL.41652 /2019 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. LPA6102019 1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the original petitioners challenging the judgement and order dated 29th August, 2019 LPA6102019 Page 1 of 8 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 6815/2019, wherein the ord...
Rakesh Kumar Jain vs.dr. Amrit Lal Shukla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2019
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + RC.REV. 192/2017 & Crl. M.A. 15378/2017 Judgment delivered on:18. 09.2019 RAKESH KUMAR JAIN versus DR AMRIT LAL SHUKLA ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr. Piyush Jain, Adv. with petitioner in person. For the Respondent: Mr. Satish Sahai, Adv. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner impugns order dated 26.12.2016, 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 eviction of the petitioner on the ground of bonafide necessity under Section 14(1) (e) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 from shop No.3 of property bearing 1372, Shastri Nagar, Delhi, more particularly as shown in red colour in the site plan attached to the eviction petition.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner under inst...
Kashi Ram & Ors. Vs.anita Garg
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2019
$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:18. h September, 2019 + CM (M) 1376/2019 KASHI RAM & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Ms. Praveena Gautam, Ms. Anusueya and Mr. Pawan Kumar Shukla, Advocates. (M:9810243904) ANITA GARG versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Balaji Subramanian, Mr. Kabeer Srivastava and Ms. Ishani Banerjee, Advocates. (M:9731821307) CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) CAV9262019 1. Caveat is discharged as the Caveator has appeared. CM APPL. 41665/2019 2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. CM (M) 1376/2019 & CM APPL. 41666/2019 3. The suit property is shop bearing No.69B, Khan Market, New Delhi, which is a commercial property. The Respondent/Landlady (hereinafter, Landlady) has filed an eviction petition on the ground of bonafide requirement under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The leave to defend was granted to the... Petitioner/Tenant (hereinafter, Tenant) an...
State Bank of India vs.sh. V.k. Bakshi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:18. h September, 2019 + W.P.(C) 1903/2018 STATE BANK OF INDIA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.P.B.A. Srinivasan, Adv. with Mr.Parth Tandon, Adv. versus SH. V.K. BAKSHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajiv Aggarwal, Ms. Meghna De, and Mr. Sugandh Kochhar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL) 1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails the Award dated 04.05.2017 passed by the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court No.1 Karkardooma Court, Delhi, in ID No.26/2011 whereunder the learned Labour Court has, after coming to the conclusion that the respondent was guilty of Charges levelled against him, held that the punishment of dismissal from service imposed on the respondent by the petitioner/bank, was very grave and disproportionate as neither of these charges related to any moral turpitude on his part. The Labour Court has, accordingly, s...
Narayan Kumar vs.kamal Kishore Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2019
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:18. 09.2019 C.R.P. 178/2018 & CM APPL. 35512/2018 (Early Hearing) NARAYAN KUAMR versus KAMAL KISHORE GUPTA ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr. Sundeep Sehgal, Advocate with petitioner in person. For the Respondent: Mr. Devinder Singh Khatana with Mr. Sachin Kumar Tokas, Advocates CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner impugns order dated 06.07.2018 whereby the Executing Court has sentenced the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days because the execution has remained unsatisfied for more than 4 years.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Executing Court has erred in not appreciating the judgment of the Supreme Court in Jolly George Verghese Vs. The Bank of Cochin, (1980) 2 SCC360 C.R.P. 178/2018 Page 1 of 5 3. Learned counsel further submits that an Ord...
Satbir Singh & Anr vs.the Financial Commissioner & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2019
$~76 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:18. 09.2019 LPA6072019 SATBIR SINGH & ANR ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Dhruv Sharma & Mr. Soumya Das, Advs. versus THE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER & ORS Through: ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL) CM APPL.41632 /2019 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. CM APPL.41633 /2019 This application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 145 days in preferring this appeal. Having heard the counsel for the appellants and looking into the reasons stated in the application, there are reasonable grounds for condonation of delay. We hereby condone the delay of 145 days in preferring this appeal. The application is allowed and disposed of. LPA6072019 Page 1 of 3 LPA6072019 1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the original petitioner challe...
Reliance Life Sciences Private Limited vs.m/s Genentech Inc and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on:16. 07.2019 18.09.2019 FAO(OS) 181/2016 % + RELIANCE LIFE SCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED..... Appellant Through: Mr. Chander M. Lall, Sr. Adv. With Ms. Bitika Sharma, Mr. Kapil Midha, Ms. Namrita Kochhar, Mr. Luv Virmani and Ms. Nancy Roy, Advs. versus M/S GENENTECH INC AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Niti Dixit, Mr. N. Mahavir, Ms.Samiksha Godiyal, Mr. Muizz Drab, Mr. Aubert Sebastian and Ms. Aditi Mohan, Advs. for Roche Products (I) Pvt. Ltd. Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Mr.Arjun Dev, Adv. for UOI along with Mr. Fahim Khan, Drug Inspector, in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR FAO (OS) 1Page 1 of 29 VIPIN SANGHI, J.C.M. APPL. 6426/2017 JUDGMENT Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. C.M. APPL. 22510/2016 1. The aforesaid application has been preferred, by the appella...
- ‹ Prev
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- Next ›
- Last »