Skip to content


Delhi Recent Court Judgments Home Recent Delhi Page 1 of about 48,867 results (0.024 seconds)

Jul 03 2015 (HC)

Delhi Gram Vikas Panchayat Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and Anr

Court : Delhi

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:3. d July, 2015 + W.P.(C) No.7914/2012 DELHI GRAM VIKAS PANCHAYAT Through: Mr. N.S. Dalal, Adv. ..... Petitioner Versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha and Mr. Kushal Raj, Advs. for R-1/GNCTD. Mr. Arun Birbal and Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advs. for R-2/DDA. Mr. Umesh Sharma, Adv. for R3/UOI. CORAM:HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, filed as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), flags the issue of delays on the part of the respondent no.1, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD), in processing the applications (of those whose land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894) under the Scheme framed by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi of providing alternative land as well as the delays on the part of the respondent no.2 Delhi Development Auth...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 2015 (HC)

Government of Nct of Delhi Vs. Jangli Ram and Ors

Court : Delhi

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:3. d July, 2015 % + LPA1122015 GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Biraja Mahapatra, Adv. Versus JANGLI RAM & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sudhanshu Tomar, Adv. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 This intra-court appeal impugns the judgment dated 3rd September, 2014 of the learned Single Judge allowing W.P.(C) No.5105/2013 preferred by the respondent No.1 (respondent No.2 is the Delhi Development Authority) by directing the appellant to decide the application of the respondent No.1 / writ petitioner for allotment of alternative residential plot in lieu of acquired land as per his eligibility within two months thereof and to communicate decision thereof to the respondent No.1 / writ petitioner.2. Notice of the appeal was issued. We heard the counsel for the appellant and the counsel for the respondent No.1 / writ petitioner on 24th April, 2015 and...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 2015 (HC)

Indosolar Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Anr.

Court : Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:14. 05.2015 Judgment delivered on:03. 07.2015 % + WP(C) No.3625/2013 INDOSOLAR LTD. ..... Petitioner Versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner: Dr. Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Advocate with Mr Ashish Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr Jasmeet Singh, CGSC with Mr Srivats Kaushal, Ms Kritika Mehra & Ms Astha Sharma, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J1The petitioner, is essentially aggrieved by the non-denial of subsidy to it by the respondents, under a scheme which is titled as :Special Incentive Package Scheme (in short the Scheme). 1.1 This scheme was notified by respondent no.1, to encourage, investments for setting up semi-conductor fabrication, and other micro and nano technology manufacturing industries, in India. 1.2 Since, the industry is supposedly capital intensive, and is required to frequently adapt to technological chang...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 2015 (HC)

Bptp Limited Vs. Cpi India I Limited and Ors

Court : Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.A. 8/2015 & IA No.3496/2015 Reserved on: May 25, 2015 Decision on: July 3, 2015 BPTP LIMITED Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ciccu Mukhopadhya, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kaushik Poddar, Advocate. versus CPI INDIA I LIMITED & ORs. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Bindi Dave and Mr. Aman Gandhi, Advocates for Respondent No1. AND + O.M.P. 79/2015 CPI INDIA I LTD Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Bindi Dave and Mr. Aman Gandhi, Advocates. versus BPTP LTD AND OTHERS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kaushik Poddar and Mr. Vivek Raja, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT % 03.07.2015 1. Arbitration Appeal No.8 of 2015 by BPTP Ltd. (BPTP) is directed against an order dated 5th January 2015 passed by the Appellate Tribunal (AT) in an application filed by CPI India I Ltd. (CPI) under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Ac...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 2015 (HC)

Cpi India I Ltd Vs. Bptp Ltd and Others

Court : Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.A. 8/2015 & IA No.3496/2015 Reserved on: May 25, 2015 Decision on: July 3, 2015 BPTP LIMITED Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ciccu Mukhopadhya, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kaushik Poddar, Advocate. versus CPI INDIA I LIMITED & ORs. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Bindi Dave and Mr. Aman Gandhi, Advocates for Respondent No1. AND + O.M.P. 79/2015 CPI INDIA I LTD Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Bindi Dave and Mr. Aman Gandhi, Advocates. versus BPTP LTD AND OTHERS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kaushik Poddar and Mr. Vivek Raja, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT % 03.07.2015 1. Arbitration Appeal No.8 of 2015 by BPTP Ltd. (BPTP) is directed against an order dated 5th January 2015 passed by the Appellate Tribunal (AT) in an application filed by CPI India I Ltd. (CPI) under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Ac...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 02 2015 (HC)

Dcm Limited Vs. Shri Jassa Ram

Court : Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:27. h May, 2015 Decided on:2. d July , 2015 % + CM(M) 167/2014 DCM LIMITED Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sanjeev Anand and Mr. Arush Khanna, Advocates. versus SHRI JASSA RAM Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. S.P. Aggarwal and Mr. Himanshu Bohara, Advocates. CM(M) 169/2014 DCM LIMITED Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sanjeev Anand and Mr. Arush Khanna, Advocates. versus KRISHNA DEVI SHARMA (NOW DECEASED) THR LRS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Malhotra, Advocate for LR No.3. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Since identical orders involving identical question of law have been impugned in the present petitions, the two petitions are being decided by a common judgment.2. A brief exposition of facts is that the petitioner DCM Limited owns 52 acres of land at Bara Hindu Rao and Kishan Ganj, Delhi (in short the suit property). In the suit property the respondent Jassa Ram is a tenant in shop No.10, Ganesh Line No.6, ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 02 2015 (HC)

Dcm Limited Vs. Krishna Devi Sharma (Now Deceased)

Court : Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:27. h May, 2015 Decided on:2. d July , 2015 % + CM(M) 167/2014 DCM LIMITED Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sanjeev Anand and Mr. Arush Khanna, Advocates. versus SHRI JASSA RAM Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. S.P. Aggarwal and Mr. Himanshu Bohara, Advocates. CM(M) 169/2014 DCM LIMITED Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sanjeev Anand and Mr. Arush Khanna, Advocates. versus KRISHNA DEVI SHARMA (NOW DECEASED) THR LRS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Malhotra, Advocate for LR No.3. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Since identical orders involving identical question of law have been impugned in the present petitions, the two petitions are being decided by a common judgment.2. A brief exposition of facts is that the petitioner DCM Limited owns 52 acres of land at Bara Hindu Rao and Kishan Ganj, Delhi (in short the suit property). In the suit property the respondent Jassa Ram is a tenant in shop No.10, Ganesh Line No.6, ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 02 2015 (HC)

Sonu Kumar and Ors. Vs. The State of Delhi

Court : Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:13. 04.2015 Judgment delivered on:02. 07.2015 Crl.A. 852/2008 SONU KUMAR & ORS. Through: ..... Appellant Mr. S.K. Duggal, Advocate. versus THE STATE OF DELHI Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Lovkesh Sawhney, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 15.09.2008, in SC No.73/2006, arising out of F.I.R. No.885/05, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, convicting the Appellants for the offence under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), and the order on sentence dated 20.09.2008 whereby for the offence under Section 498A, IPC, the appellants Sonu Kumar (hereinafter referred to as Appellant No.1), Ashok Kumar (hereinafter referred to as Appellant No.2) and Suraj (hereinafter referred to as Appellant No.3) were sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) for a period of two and a half years and to pay a fine of Rs. ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 02 2015 (HC)

Jhamman Lal Vs. Tara Chand Sharma

Court : Delhi

$~1. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:02. 07.2015 RSA712015 & C.M. Nos.2959/2015, 5653/2015, 6774/2015, 7036/2015 JHAMMAN LAL Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Sachin Chopra and Mr. Kamal Bansal, Advocates versus TARA CHAND SHARMA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. S.N. Gupta, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The present second appeal under Section 100 CPC is directed against the judgment rendered by Sh. R.K. Gauba, District & Sessions Judge (South District), Saket, New Delhi (as his lordship then was) in RCA No.35/2013 titled Jhaman Lal v. S. Tara Chand Sharma dated 14.10.2014.2. The learned Judge by the impugned judgment dismissed the first appeal preferred by the appellant and affirmed the judgment and decree passed by Ms. Richa Gusain Solanki, Civil Judge in Suit No.283/2008.3. The appellant was the defendant in the said suit. The suit had been preferred to seek possession and damages in respect of an immovable pro...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 02 2015 (HC)

Vidya Wati Vs. Punjab Khadi Mandal

Court : Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 1022/2011 Reserved on:19. h May, 2015 Decided on:2. d July, 2015 % VIDYA WATI Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajesh Yadav, Ms. Ruchira, Advs. versus PUNJAB KHADI MANDAL ..... Respondent Through Mr. Yogesh Swaroop, Mr. B.K.Roy, Advs. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Smt. Shanta Devi, Smt. Kanta Devi, Smt. Kaushalya Devi and Smt. Shama Devi four sisters through their attorney Shri Ram Prakash Yadav filed an eviction petition against the respondent Punjab Khadi Mandal, Sultan Bhawan under Section 14(1)(a)&(j) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short the DRC Act) in respect of one room, kitchen, bath and WC along with open terrace situated on the second floor in H.No.1667, Gali No.35, Abdul Rehman Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi (in short the tenanted premises). Smt. Vidyawati Devi the 5th sister of Shanta Devi, Kanta Devi, Kaushalya Devi and Shama Devi was impleaded as a respondent. It was stated that the tenanted pr...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //