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.
Sachin Talwar vs.sandeep Agrawal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:2. d September, 2019 CS(COMM) 516/2017 SACHIN TALWAR ..... Plaintiff Represented by: Mr. Jugal Wadhwa, Mr. Rishabh Wadhwa, Mr. Raghav Goyal, Advs. with plaintiff in person. Represented by: Defendant ex-parte ..... Defendant versus SANDEEP AGRAWAL CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. By the present suit the plaintiff, inter alia, seeks a decree of specific performance for the agreement to sell dated 11th March, 2016 further extended by the supplementary agreement/ MOU dated 30th September, 2016 and 6th April, 2016 by receiving the balance consideration of 20 lakhs thereby transferring the suit property by executing a registered sale deed and handing-over peaceful and vacant possession of suit property. In the alternative a money decree for a sum of 1,04,00,000/- along with interest, a decree of permanent injunction and cost.2. Case of the plaintiff is that the defendant who is a builder is the owner and ...
Sh .Ram Chander Dhawan vs.sh. Shiv Ram & Ors (The Bajaj Allianz Genera ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-2019
$~7 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:02. 09.2019 MAC.APP. 951/2014 SH. RAM CHANDER DHAWAN Through: Mr. S N Parashar, Advocate ..... Appellant Versus SH. SHIV RAM & ORS (THE BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD) Through: Ms. Manu Kushwaha, Adv ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J (Oral) This appeal seeks enhancement of the award of compensation dated 1. 24.05.2014 passed by the learned MACT in MACT No.386/08, on the ground that admittedly the appellant/injured was hospitalised for 55 days on different dates at i) Max Super Speciality Hospital, ii) Sir Ganga Ram Hospital and iii) Pentamed Hospital for treatment of the injuries caused to him in the motor vehicular accident. The appellant was a pensioner and was unable to prove loss of income but he claimed to be working at Sethi Medicos. However, no proof was brought on record apropos his loss of income. Accordingly, no compensation was granted by this Court under t...
Subhash Chand Goel & Ors vs. Hans Raj Gupta & Co Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:25. h July, 2019 Pronounced on:2. d September, 2019 CM(M) 340/2012 with CM APPL. 5107/2012 & 5519/2018 SUBHASH CHAND GOEL & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Advocate. versus HANS RAJ GUPTA & CO PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gupta, Mr. Abhishek Paruthi, Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocate for R-1. % CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN JUDGMENT1 By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners challenge an order dated 31.01.2012, passed by the Rent Control Tribunal in RCT No.49/2010, by which the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the respondent herein, and set aside the order of the Additional Rent Controller dated 05.03.2010 evicting the respondent from the suit premises. Facts 2. The Eviction Petition was filed by the petitioners herein against the respondents on 11.08.2003, seeking the eviction of the respondent CM(M) 340/20...
Sushma Lodhi & Ors. Vs.union of India& Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-2019
$~56 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:2. d September, 2019 + W.P.(C) 9526/2019 SUSHMA LODHI & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Varun Thakur, Mr. Brajesh Nita Pandey and Ms. Sukhanandi, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA& ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain and Ms. Jyoti for Advocates Tyagi, LAC/L&B. Mr. Arjun Pant, Advocate for DDA. Mr. Pratyush Miglani and Ms. Smriti Varma, Advocates for R-1/UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA SANJEEV NARULA, J.(Oral):1. This is a second round of challenge in respect of land acquisition proceedings after the enactment of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter 'the 2013 Act') in the present matter.... Petitioners' first contest was by way of W.P. (C) No.3680/2016, titled as Sushma Lodhi v. Union Of India, wherein a W.P.(C) 9526/2019 Page 1 of 11 declaration was sought to the effect...
Citi Group Inc. & Ors. Vs.citi Finance Service & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Decided on: September 02, 2019 + CS(OS) 877/2017 & IA154132017 & IA117242018 CITI GROUP INC. & ORS. ..... Plaintiffs Represented by: Mr.Chander M.Lall, Sr. Adv. With Ms.Nancy Roy and Ms.Kangan Roda, Advs. versus CITI FINANCE SERVICE & ANR .....Defendants Represented by: Ms.Pooja Tandon, Adv. for D2 Mr.Manish Kumar, Mr.Shivam Singh, Mr.Udian Sharma and Mr.Jaideep Khanna, Advs. for State of Bihar CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. The plaintiffs have filed the present suit inter alia seeking a permanent injunction against the defendants from carrying on its business whatsoever under the mark or name CITI, CITI FINANCE SERVICES and CITI with ARC Design, or any other mark/device deceptively or confusingly similar to the plaintiffs registered trade mark CITI, CITIBANK, CITIFINANCIAL and the CITI with ACR Design and CITI formative marks and also from manufacturing, selling or offering for sale, advertising, marketing or...
Suresh Jain vs.mandeep Singh Batra & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CM(M) 1307/2016 SURESH JAIN Reserved on:25. h July, 2019 Pronounced on:02nd September, 2019 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. V.P. Rana & Ms. Pooja Wason, Advocates alongwith... Petitioner in Person. versus MANDEEP SINGH BATRA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. S.C. Singhal, Advocate. Mr. T.S. Nanda, Advocate with R-2 & 3. SI Ranbir Singh, PS Nangloi. % CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN JUDGMENT1 This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the plaintiff in Suit No.68103/2016, challenging the order dated 18.11.2016, passed by the ADJ-07 (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, by which the plaintiffs application for amendment of the plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as the CPC]., was dismissed. CM(M) 1307/2016 Page 1 of 17 2. The suit in question was filed, originally in this Court, on 11.08.2008 with the following prayers: 30. Having regard to what has b...
Philomena Gervase & Anr. Vs.ravin Mehra & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-2019
$~ 17 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Decided on:-"2nd September, 2019 FAO2932019 & CM No.33312/2019 PHILOMENA GERVASE & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Sanjay Mishra, Mr. Prabhu Singh & Mr. Nitesh Singla, Advs. versus RAVIN MEHRA & ANR. Through: ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Rajiv Garg, Mr. K.K. Aggarwal, Ms. Gayatri Aggarwal & Mr. Ayush Aggarwal, Advs. for R-1. Mr. Sanjeev Sagar, Standing counsel with Ms. Nazia Praveen, Adv. for R-2/DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The appeal at hand is by the plaintiff whose prayer for ad interim injunction has been declined by the civil court.2. On the strength, inter alia, of documents in the nature of Agreement to Sell, Special Power of Attorney (SPA), General Power of Attorney (GPA), Will, Receipt etc. all dated 24.02.1999, purportedly executed by the original allottee Prem Nath Mehra (late father of the first respondent), the first appellant claims to be the owner of property described as Pocket-R(U) Block, flat...
Sudesh Kumar @ Chhotu vs.om Prakash Rai & Ors (Iffco Tokio General Ins ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-2019
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:02. 09.2019 SUDESH KUMAR @ CHHOTU Through: Ms. Sarika Goel, Advocate. ..... Appellant % + MAC.APP. 477/2018 versus OM PRAKASH RAI & ORS ( IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ) ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. B.R. Sharma, Advocate for R-2. Mr. Varun Sarin, Advocate for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(Oral) 1. This appeal seeks enhancement of the compensation granted by learned MACT vide order dated 10.10.2017 in MACT No.4175/16, on the ground that although the appellant has suffered 98% permanent physical impairment (PPI) apropos both his lower limbs i.e. below knee amputation his functional disability was assessed at merely 49%. The impugned order has reasoned on the issue, as under: 24. Loss of future income: As per Aadhar Card Ex. PW-1/3, date of birth of petitioner is 01.11.1995. Therefore, he was around 21 years at the time of accident i.e. 03.03.2016.... Petitioner has suffered 98% permanent...
Mohinder Jeet Singh vs.bmw India Pvt Ltd & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:16. h July, 2019 Pronounced on:02. d September, 2019 + CM(M) 93/2018 MOHINDER JEET SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Faheem Shah, Advocate. versus BMW INDIA PVT LTD & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Aditya V.Singh, Advocate for R-1. % CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN JUDGMENT1 This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is filed by the plaintiff in CS No.7860/2016, challenging an order dated 21.09.2017, passed by the ADJ-06 (South East), Saket Courts, New Delhi, whereby the Trial Court has deleted the defendants No.4 and 5 (being the respondents No.1 and 2 herein) from the array of parties in the suit.2. The plaintiff filed the suit on 24.12.2014 with regard to allegation of certain defects in a second-hand car (BMW320, 2011 model, bearing registration number DL3C AM7007 purchased by him on 12.03.2014. He sought recovery of a sum of 19,80,000/- and CM(M) 93/2018 Page 1 of 14 interest thereupon. The plainti...
Anil Kumar vs.devender Kumar & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:2. d September, 2019 CS(OS) 350/2018 & IA No.9403/2019 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) ANIL KUMAR ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. K.K. Sharma, Adv. Versus DEVENDER KUMAR & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar, Adv. for D- 1&2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The counsel for the defendants no.1 and 2 states that the costs imposed vide order dated 10th July, 2019 have been paid and has furnished the receipt of the same to the Court Master.2. The plaintiff has instituted this suit against as many as 13 defendants, for partition of properties bearing Nos.(a) H-75/14, Khasra No.419,428 and 429, Gamri Road, Jai Prakash Nagar, Ghonda, Delhi, (b) K-25/2, Gali No.20, Gangotri Vihar, Ghonda, Delhi, (c) D-406/2, Gali No.20, Bhajanpura, Delhi, (d) D-408, Main Gamri Road, Ghonda, Delhi, and, (e) H-75/11, Gamri Road, Jain Prakash Nagar, Ghonda, Delhi.3. The suit was entertained, though no ex parte relief sought granted. Pleadin...
- ‹ Prev
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 80
- Next ›
- Last »