Suit No. : 570/15 13/01/2016. Counsel for the plaintiff. Counsel for the defendant.
|
|
- Duane Tate
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Suit No. : 570/15 Counsel for the plaintiff. Counsel for the defendant. Vakalatnama filed by the counsel for the defendant alongwith WS. Copy given. Now put up for replication / documents / admission denial and framing of issues on
2 Suit No. : 332/12 Counsel for the plaintiff. None for the defendant. Arguments heard. Now put up for orders on
3 Ex. No. : 96/10 Counsel for the DH. After some arguments, the counsel for the DH states that she be given some time to move a proper application for condonation of delay. Heard. Allowed. Now put up for further proceedings on
4 RCA No. : 57/13 Counsel for the appellant. Counsel for LR of respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 2 in person. The counsel for the appellant has moved an application U/s 151 CPC for waving of cost imposed on , and which was imposed because the appellant had not taken steps for the service of respondent No. 2. It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the counsel for the respondent No. 2 was served on and the receipt is already filed on record by him on in the Court. It is submitted by him that since the counsel for the respondent No. 2 was served so he has not taken steps for the service of respondent No. 2. It is further submitted by him that this fact could not be informed either to the Ld predecessor of this court or to this Court due to inadvertence. He seeks the waiver of the 3 costs imposed on these dates. Heard. Perused the records. The record shows that Counsel Sh. BB Sharma was served with the notice of the appeal on and this fact also not denied by the respondent No. 2 that Sh. B.B. Sharma was not his counsel. In view of this the above mentioned 3 costs imposed on the appellant are waived. Further cost of Rs. 6500/- paid. The appellant has also moved an application U/s 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 2 days in filing the application U/o Contd...
5 --2-- XXII Rule 3 CPC. Copy given. Respondent No. 2 submits that he has no objection if the application U/s 5 of the Limitation Act and application U/o 22 Rule 3 CPC are allowed. However, it is submitted by the counsel for the respondent No. 1 that no document has been placed on record in regard to the death of the deceased appellant, however, he has no objection if the applications U/s 5 of the Limitation Act and application U/o 22 Rule 3 CPC are allowed. In view of this, the application U/s 5 of the Limitation Act is allowed and the delay is condoned and application U/o XXII Rule 3 CPC is also allowed. The LRs of deceased appellant are taken on record. Now put up for filing of amended memo of parties on the next date of hearing and also for disposal of the appeal on
6 Suit No. : 48A/2014 Counsel for the parties. PW 2 Sunil Kumar Arora cross examined and discharged. Now put up for remaining PE on
7 Suit No. : 378/15 Counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant Raj Pal in person. Reply to the application U/s 151 CPC moved by the plaintiff not filed. It is submitted by defendant Raj Pal that he has not received the copy of the application U/s 151 CPC but this averment of his is not believable looking into the previous order sheet. However, in the interest of justice, last opportunity is granted to file the reply to the application U/s 151 CPC subject to cost of Rs. 2500/-. Now put up for filing of reply to the application U/s 151 CPC by the defendant on
8 Suit No. : 379/15 Plaintiff in person. Counsel for the defendant. Put up with the connected case on
9 Ex. No. : 216/10 Ashok Arora Vs. Naresh Kumar DH in person. File taken up today on an application U/s 151 CPC for ratification of order for the publication of proclamation of the sale in the Statesman instead of the New paper The Hindustan Times moved by the defendant. Heard. Perused the application. In the facts and circumstances as mentioned in the application, the application is allowed and the DH is directed to get the publication of proclamation of the sale published in the news paper Statesman instead of Hindustan Times. The application is disposed off accordingly. Put up on the date already fixed i.e Copy of order be given dasti as prayed.
10 CS No. 378/15 Counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant not served. Be served again on filing of PF and RC as also through affixation for Steps to be taken within three days. Put up for service of defendant on
11 CS No. 417/15 Proxy Counsel for the plaintiff. Memo of Appearance filed on behalf of the defendants. Put up for Vakalatnama and for filing of WS on
12 CS No. 621/15 Proxy Counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant not served. Be served again on filing of PF and RC for Steps to be taken within three days. Put up for service of defendant on
13 Suit No. 620/15 Proxy Counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant not served. Be served again on filing of PF and RC for Steps to be taken within three days. Put up for service of defendant on
14 CS No. 394/15 Proxy Counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant not served. Be served again on filing of PF and RC for Steps to be taken within three days. Put up for service of defendant on
15 CS No. 376/15 Counsel for the plaintiff. As per the report, defendant Amar Pal has expired. Counsel seeks time to file an application for substitution of his LRs. Put up for further proceedings on
16 RCA No. 18/15 Proxy Counsel for the appellant. Proxy Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2. Steps for service of defendant no. 3 not taken. Respondent no. 3 be served again on filing of PF and RC for Steps to be taken within three days.
17 Suit No. 156/13 Plaintiff in person alongwith Sh. Chittranjan, Adv. Sh. R.S. Gautam, proxy counsel for the defendant. He seeks time for filing the Vakalatnama and a seeks adjournment. In my opinion this is no ground for adjournment. On the last date of hearing, fresh Vakalatnama was filed and the counsel who had filed the Vakalatnama, took time to crossexamine the witness, and the matter was adjourned, subject to costs of Rs. 15,000/-, which is also not paid. And, today also a new counsel has come, who is even seeking time for filing the WS, which shows the casual manner, in which the defendant is taking the court proceedings. In view of the same, right to further cross-examination of PW-1 is closed. Vide separate statement of the plaintiff, PE closed. Put up for DE on List of witnesses to be filed within ten days. Defendant is directed to supply the advance copy of evidence by way of affidavit to the counsel for the plaintiff, seven days prior to the date of hearing.
18 CS No. 126/15 Counsel for the plaintiff. Proxy Counsel Sh. Falit Kaushik, for the defendant. He has placed on record the medical certificate of witness Dr. Sudhir C. Joseph. Perused the medical certificate. Witness is exempted from appearance for today only. Affidavit of this witness has already been supplied to the counsel for the plaintiff. Put up for DE on
19 Suit No. 163/15 Counsels for the parties. heard. Arguments on the applications under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC Put up for Orders on
20 Suit No. 482/15 Plaintiff in person alongwith proxy counsel Sh. Nishant Bhadoriya, Adv. Counsel for the defendant nos. 1 to 3. Counsel for the defendant nos. 9 to 14. Counsel for the defendant no. 15. Ahlamad has produced a parcha yadasht, as file is not traceable. It is submitted by the counsel for he defendant no. 15 that plaintiff was supposed to supply the plaint and other documents, which has not been done by the plaintiff. Plaintiff is directed to supply the same, within three days. Defendant nos. 1 to 3 has filed their original documents alongwith list. Defendant nos. 1 to 3 also filed an application under Section 151 CPC. Copy given. WS filed on behalf of defendant nos. 9 to 14. Copy given. Put up for filing of WS on behalf of defendant no. 15, and reply to the WS of defendant nos. 9 to 14, and reply to the application under Section 151 CPC, for
21 CS No. 181/14 Counsels for the parties. Cost of Rs.20,000/- paid. Defendant has moved an application under Section 151 CPC, for recalling of order dated , by virtue of which the DE was closed. The application is accompanied by the copy of the order of the Hon'ble High Court, which shows the presence of the Counsel in court no. 10. Application is also accompanied by the text of the conversation, done on SMS, between main counsel and the proxy counsel. Copy given. Counsel for the plaintiff submits that he does not want to file any reply, and has no objection, if the application is allowed, and only one opportunity is granted to the defendant, to lead entire DE. In view of the no objection accorded by the counsel for the plaintiff, the application under Section 151 CPC is allowed. Defendant is granted one opportunity to lead entire DE. Put up for DE on List of witnesses to be filed within ten days. Defendant is directed to supply the advance copy of evidence by way of affidavit to the counsel for the plaintiff, seven days prior to the date of hearing.
22 Suit No. 241/13 Counsels for the parties. No PW is present. Counsel for the plaintiff has moved an application under order 7 Rule 14(3) alongwith certain documents. Copy given. Put up for reply and arguments on the above said application on Cost be also paid on the next date of hearing.
23 CS No. 352/15 Counsels for the parties. Counsel for the defendant has moved an application under Section 151 CPC. Copy given. Counsel for the plaintiff seeks time to file the reply. Put up for disposal of the above said application on
24 CS No. 250/09 Parties in person. Counsel for the defendant. LC Sh. Sartaj Ali, Advocate is present. He has made the clarifications. Parties seek some more time to work out the modalities. In view of this, put up for further proceedings on
25 CS No. 219/15 Proxy Counsel Sh. G.P. Pant for Sh. Rohit Kumar, Adv, for the plaintiff. Proxy counsel for the defendant. It is submitted by the proxy counsel for the plaintiff that the main counsel is suffering from joint pain in his knees, so, he is unable to come to the court today. He seeks adjournment. In the interests of justice, granted. Put up for final arguments on
26 Suit No. 222/15 Proxy Counsel Sh. G.P. Pant for Sh. Rohit Kumar, Adv, for the plaintiff. Proxy counsel for the defendant. Put up with the connected case on
27 Suit No. 164/14 Counsels for the parties. Plaintiff no. 2 in person. Defendant no. 2 in person. An application for setting aside the ex-parte order dated , moved on behalf of the defendant no. 1. It is urged by the counsel for the defendant no. 1 that the defendant no. 1 has not been keeping well, and he has placed on record his medical certificate alongwith the application. It is further submitted by him that the defendant no. 1 is still getting treatment in Sucheta Kriplani Hospital,as he is paralytic. But, no document with regard to his paralysis, has been filed on record. On the other hand, it is urged by the counsel for the plaintiff that the defendant has been appearing in the court alongwith counsel. It is further urged by the counsel for the plaintiff that the defendant was proceeded ex-parte on , and thereafter he appeared in the court on and alongwith proxy counsel and then again on , when the ex-parte evidence was led. It was only on , that the present application under disposal has been moved. It is nothing but just a delay tactics. It is further submitted by him that he has no objection if the application is allowed, but subject to cost. Heard. Perused the application. In view of the no objection accorded by the counsel for the plaintiff, the application is allowed, the exparte order dated is set aside, subject to cost of Rs.4,000/-. Counsel for the defendant no. 2 has also moved an application for setting aside the ex-parte order dated It is urged by the counsel for the plaintiff that he has no objection if the application is allowed, but subject to heavy cost. Heard. Perused the application. In view of the no objection
28 accorded by the counsel for the plaintiff, the application is allowed, the exparte order dated is set aside, subject to cost of Rs.4,000/-. WS filed on behalf of defendant no. 1. Copy given. Put up for replication, documents, admission denial and framing of issues on
29 RCA No. 11/14 Parties in person alongwith Counsel. Counsels for the parties submits that there are chances of settlement, as parties are ready to settle the matter. In view of this, put up for further proceedings on
30 Suit No. 124/13 Counsel for the plaintiff. Counsel for the plaintiff seeks time to file fresh application for restoration of the suit. Heard. Allowed. Put up for further proceedings on
31 Suit No. 396/15 Plaintiff in person alongwith counsel. Counsel for the defendant. It is pointed out by the counsels that on , it has been mentioned in the order that it was submitted by the counsel for the defendant that as per the report of the SDM, the old record has been weeded out, rather it was submitted by the counsel for the plaintiff, and not for the defendant. So, this correction is accordingly made in the last order, and the 'counsel for the defendant' be read as 'counsel for the plaintiff'. Counsel for the plaintiff seeks time to file the secondary evidence in respect of the GPA. Put up for PE on
32 Suit No. 160/15 Counsel for the plaintiff. Counsel for the defendant. Cross-examination of PW-1 recorded partly. Further crossexamination is deferred at the request of the counsel for the defendant. Put up for RPE on The date is given at the request of the plaintiff.
33 Suit No. 267A/15 Son of the plaintiff. Counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant Vinod Kumar in person. An application under Order 18 rule 2 and 17 r/w Section 151 CPC, filed on behalf of the defendant no. 7. Copy given. Put up for reply and arguments on
34 Suit No. 565/15 Counsel for the petitioner. Sh. Mudit Rastogi, AR of the defendant. Copy given. Reply to the petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act filed. Put up for arguments on
35 Suit No. 566/15 Counsel for the petitioner. Sh. Mudit Rastogi, AR of the defendant. Copy given. Reply to the petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act filed. Put up for arguments on
36 CS No. 203/15 HDFC BANK VS. RAHUL KUMAR File received by way of transfer from the court of Sh. Vinod Kumar, ADJ-13 (Central), THC, Delhi vide order No. 1948/ /F.3. (4)/adj/gaz/15 Dated 17 Oct of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, (HQ), Delhi. It be checked and registered. Counsel for the plaintiff. Issue notice of the petition to the respondent on filing of PF and RC for Steps to be taken within three days.
37 Suit No. HDFC BANK LTD VS. CHAMAN BANSAL File received by way of transfer from the court of Sh. Vinod Kumar, ADJ-13 (Central), THC, Delhi vide order No. 1948/ /F.3. (4)/adj/gaz/15 Dated 17 Oct of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, (HQ), Delhi. It be checked and registered. Counsel for the plaintiff. Issue notice of the petition to the respondent on filing of PF and RC for Steps to be taken within three days.
38 CS No. HDFC BANK LTD. VS. KAMAL SHARMA File received by way of transfer from the court of Sh. Vinod Kumar, ADJ-13 (Central), THC, Delhi vide order No. 1948/ /F.3. (4)/adj/gaz/15 Dated 17 Oct of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, (HQ), Delhi. It be checked and registered. Counsel for the plaintiff. Issue notice of the petition to the respondent on filing of PF and RC for Steps to be taken within three days.
39 Suit No. HDFC BANK LTD VS. NITIN SHARMA File received by way of transfer from the court of Sh. Vinod Kumar, ADJ-13 (Central), THC, Delhi vide order No. 1948/ /F.3. (4)/adj/gaz/15 Dated 17 Oct of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, (HQ), Delhi. It be checked and registered. Counsel for the plaintiff. Issue notice of the petition to the respondent on filing of PF and RC for Steps to be taken within three days.
40 Suit No. TEXMACO INFRASTRUCTURE VS. VINEET BHALLA File received by way of transfer from the court of Sh. Vinod Kumar, ADJ-13 (Central), THC, Delhi vide order No. 1948/ /F.3. (4)/adj/gaz/15 Dated 17 Oct of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, (HQ), Delhi. It be checked and registered. Counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant in person alongwith counsel Put up for admission denial, documents and framing of issues on
41 Suit No. TEXMACO INFRASTRUCTURE VS. ANKIT SHARMA File received by way of transfer from the court of Sh. Vinod Kumar, ADJ-13 (Central), THC, Delhi vide order No. 1948/ /F.3. (4)/adj/gaz/15 Dated 17 Oct of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, (HQ), Delhi. It be checked and registered. Counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant in person alongwith counsel Put up for admission denial, documents and framing of issues on
42 Suit No. TEXMACO INFRASTRUCTURE VS. JAI KISHORE File received by way of transfer from the court of Sh. Vinod Kumar, ADJ-13 (Central), THC, Delhi vide order No. 1948/ /F.3. (4)/adj/gaz/15 Dated 17 Oct of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, (HQ), Delhi. It be checked and registered. Counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant in person alongwith counsel Put up for admission denial, documents and framing of issues on
43 Suit No. TEXMACO INFRASTRUCTURE VS. NITIN KUMAR File received by way of transfer from the court of Sh. Vinod Kumar, ADJ-13 (Central), THC, Delhi vide order No. 1948/ /F.3. (4)/adj/gaz/15 Dated 17 Oct of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, (HQ), Delhi. It be checked and registered. Counsel for the plaintiff. Defendant in person alongwith counsel Put up for admission denial, documents and framing of issues on
44 Suit No. 206/15 HDFC BANK VS. PINKY SINGH File received by way of transfer from the court of Sh. Vinod Kumar, ADJ-13 (Central), THC, Delhi vide order No. 1948/ /F.3. (4)/adj/gaz/15 Dated 17 Oct of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, (HQ), Delhi. It be checked and registered. Counsel for the applicant/petitioner. It is stated by the counsel for the applicant/petitioner that he wants to withdraw the present petition. His statement to this effect recorded on a separate sheet. In view of the statement of the counsel for the applicant/petitioner, the petition under Section 9 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, is dismissed as withdrawn. File be consigned to record room.
45 Suit No. ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. Mr. Mahabir Prasad Dubey registered. Fresh case received on assignment. It be checked and Present: Sh. N. Balaraman, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff. Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff has filed an application under Order XL Rule 1 r/w Section 151 CPC for seeking appointment of Ex-parte receiver. It is averred in the application that the plaintiff bank advanced a loan of Rs. 11,42,606/- to the defendant for purchasing a vehicle make EICHER bearing registration no. DL1GC1260. The said loan was to be repaid in 35 equated monthly installments of Rs.39,262/-, out of which respondent has paid 25 installments and has committed default of 4 installments. In these circumstances, he prays for the appointment of Ex-parte Receiver. The notice of this petition has been served through RC for , but despite notice, the defendant has failed to make the payment of the termination amount, as demanded by the plaintiff bank in notice. I have heard Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff and perused the application as well as document placed on record. Perusal of the above shows that plaintiff advanced a loan of Rs.11,42,606/-, to the defendant for purchasing a vehicle bearing registration no. DL1GC1260. The said loan was to be repaid by the defendant in 35 equated monthly installments. However, defendant has paid 25 installments out of 35 installments and has committed default of 4 installments, till filing of the suit. The vehicle in question was hypothecated by the defendant and is the only security for repayment of loan. If the defendant succeeds in creating third party interest in respect to the vehicle in question, which is hypothecated by him, then the plaintiff shall suffer irreparable loss and injury, moreover, he has failed to adhere the financial discipline of repayment of loan.
46 The above facts thus clearly shows that plaintiff has a primafacie case for seeking appointment of an Ex-parte receiver to repossess the vehicle in question from the defendant. The balance of convenience also lies in favour of plaintiff. Accordingly, request made by the plaintiff for appointment of Ex-parte Receiver is accepted. Mr. Akshat Saxena/Rajesh Singh, Representative of the plaintiff bank, is hereby appointed as receiver with the direction to repossess the vehicle make EICHER bearing registration no. DL1GC1260. After repossessing the vehicle from defendant, receiver shall prepare the inventories of the vehicle in question and shall keep the said vehicle in his safe custody till further order. The receiver is also directed to file the status report before the next date. Put up for service of defendant on filing of PF and RC for Steps to be taken within three days. Order be given dasti, as prayed. ADJ;DELHI
47 Suit No. ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. Mr. Rakesh Kumar registered. Fresh case received on assignment. It be checked and Present: Sh. N. Balaraman, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff. Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff has filed an application under Order XL Rule 1 r/w Section 151 CPC for seeking appointment of Ex-parte receiver. It is averred in the application that the plaintiff bank advanced a loan of Rs. 3,95,920/- to the defendant for purchasing a vehicle make TATA ACE bearing registration no. DL1LT3788. The said loan was to be repaid in 48 equated monthly installments of Rs.11224/-, out of which respondent has paid 19 installments and has committed default of 3 installments. In these circumstances, he prays for the appointment of Ex-parte Receiver. The notice of this petition has been served through RC for , but despite notice, the defendant has failed to make the payment of the termination amount, as demanded by the plaintiff bank in notice. I have heard Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff and perused the application as well as document placed on record. Perusal of the above shows that plaintiff advanced a loan of Rs.11,42,606/-, to the defendant for purchasing a vehicle bearing registration no. DL1GC1260. The said loan was to be repaid by the defendant in 35 equated monthly installments. However, defendant has paid 25 installments out of 35 installments and has committed default of 4 installments, till filing of the suit. The vehicle in question was hypothecated by the defendant and is the only security for repayment of loan. If the defendant succeeds in creating third party interest in respect to the vehicle in question, which is hypothecated by him, then the plaintiff shall suffer irreparable loss and injury, moreover, he has failed to adhere the financial discipline of repayment of loan.
48 The above facts thus clearly shows that plaintiff has a primafacie case for seeking appointment of an Ex-parte receiver to repossess the vehicle in question from the defendant. The balance of convenience also lies in favour of plaintiff. Accordingly, request made by the plaintiff for appointment of Ex-parte Receiver is accepted. Mr. Akshat Saxena/Rajesh Singh, Representative of the plaintiff bank, is hereby appointed as receiver with the direction to repossess the vehicle make EICHER bearing registration no. DL1GC1260. After repossessing the vehicle from defendant, receiver shall prepare the inventories of the vehicle in question and shall keep the said vehicle in his safe custody till further order. The receiver is also directed to file the status report before the next date. Put up for service of defendant on filing of PF and RC for Steps to be taken within three days. Order be given dasti, as prayed. ADJ;DELHI
49 Suit No. Brij Mohan Gote Wala & Anr. Vs. Sh.Padam Chand Vaish & Anr. Counsels for the parties. Part arguments heard. Put up for further arguments on Interim order to be continued. Copy of the order be given dasti.
50 CS No. 396/15 M/s Alankit Assignments Ltd. Vs. Ms. Shubhita Aggarwal & Anr. Counsel for the petitioner. He has moved an application under Section 151 CPC alongwith certain documents. Issue notice of this application to the respondents on filing of PF for the date fixed, i.e Till then, operation of the impugned award dated be stayed. Copy of the order be given dasti, as prayed.
51 Ex. No. 66/12 None. No time left for orders as arguments were heard in a case titled as Brij Mohan Gote Wala & Anr. Vs. Sh.Padam Chand Vaish & Anr, till 4.00 P.M. Put up for Orders on
52 Suit No. 158/15 Ms. Promila & Anr. Vs. Smt. Lal Kumari Devi & Anr. None. Vide separate Judgment dictated and announced in the open court today, the suit filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants, is decreed with cost. Decree sheet be accordingly prepared. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
53
M/s Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. Sewa Singh Dhiman. Sh. Mukesh Singh, AR of the DH in person. Sh. Varinder Singh, advocate for JD
M/s Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. Sewa Singh Dhiman Sh. Mukesh Singh, AR of the DH in person Sh. Varinder Singh, advocate for JD been settled. It is submitted by both the parties that the matter has On
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Date of decision: 17th July, 2013 RFA 383/2012. Versus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Date of decision: 17th July, 2013 RFA 383/2012 DESIGN WORKS Through: Mr. Kuldeep Kumar, Adv.... Appellant Versus ICICI BANK LTD... Respondent
More informationCS no. 26/15 M/s Simulax SMT Solutions Vs. M/s Quad. Sh. Dheeraj Bhidhudi counsel for plaintiff. None for defendant.
CS no. 26/15 M/s Simulax SMT Solutions Vs. M/s Quad Sh. Dheeraj Bhidhudi counsel for plaintiff None for defendant. Present case has been transferred to the court of Sh. Sanjay Khanagwal, learned ADJ 07,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment reserved on : 25th May, 2006 Date of decision : July 27th, 2006 RFA No. 139/2005 Sh. Ajay Kumar Grover... Appellant through
More informationThrough Mr. Atul Nigam, Mr. Amit Tiwari, Advs. versus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE OA 92/2013 & IA Nos. 132/2013, 18787/2012, 218/2013, 1581/2013 in CS(OS) 3081/2012 Reserved on: 29th October, 2013 Decided on:
More informationIn the Court of Ms. Saloni Singh, Civil Judge 02, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi District, New Delhi.
CS No. /2016 Raj Pal Singh vs. B-XI Resident Welfare Association Fresh case received today by way of assignment from the Court of Ld. Senior Civil Judge/Rent Controller, Patiala House Court, Let the same
More information* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. Judgment delivered on: 22 nd January, 2010
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI FAO. No.42/2008 & CM No. 1368/08 % Judgment reserved on: 10 th November, 2009 1. S. Gurbaksh Singh S/o. S. Tej Singh B-45, Greater Kailash I New Delhi 110048 2. S. Baljit
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: 4 th August, I.A. No.16571/2012 & I.A. No.16572/2012 in CS (OS) 2527/2009
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 4 th August, 2015 + I.A. No.16571/2012 & I.A. No.16572/2012 in CS (OS) 2527/2009 VEENA KUMARI Through... Plaintiff Mr.D.S. Vohra, Adv.
More informationSURAJ BHAN THR GPA HOLDER & ORS... Appellants Through Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Mr. Vardhman Kaushik, Advocates
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 DATE OF DECISION : 7th February, 2014 LA.APP. 632/2011 & CM No. 17689/2013 (for stay) SURAJ BHAN THR GPA HOLDER & ORS.... Appellants
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + FAO(OS) No.534/2010 & CM Nos /2010. versus. % Date of Hearing : August 25, 2010
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) No.534/2010 & CM Nos.15238-40/2010 RAJ KUMAR BARI & ORS...Appellant through Mr. S.D. Singh & Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advs. versus SHIV RANI & ORS...Respondent
More information* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. 1. Sh. Hari Prakash Sharma (deceased) S/o Late Shri Kehar Singh Sharma, Through Legal Heirs.
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI CM (M) Nos. 1201/2010 & CM No. 16773/2010 % Judgment reserved on: 17 th September, 2010 Judgment delivered on: 09 th November, 2010 1. Sh. Hari Prakash Sharma (deceased)
More informationversus Through Mr. Saleem Ahmed, ASC for the State with SI Ravi Kumar. Mr. Surender Singh, Adv. for R-2.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE W.P.(CRL) 1018/2010 & Crl. M.A.No. 8566/2010 Reserved on: 13th February, 2012 Decided on: 14th March, 2012 RAKESH KUMAR Through Mr. Nitin
More information$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Versus
$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1008/2013 KRISHAN LAL ARORA Through: Versus Date of Pronouncement: August 14, 2015... Plaintiff Dr. N. K. Khetarpal, Adv. GURBACHAN SINGH AND ORS...
More information.. IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI:AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. I.A. No /2006 in C.S.(OS) No.795/2004
.. IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI:AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE I.A. No. 11454/2006 in C.S.(OS) No.795/2004 Judgment Reserved on: 09.08.2011 Judgment Pronounced on: 02.11.2011 MADAN LAL KHANNA
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No.137/2011. DATE OF DECISION : 4th March, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No.137/2011 DATE OF DECISION : 4th March, 2011 NARESH KUMAR SAINI Through: Appellant Mr. S.P.Jha, Adv. VERSUS DAYA RANI DIXIT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. FAO.No.374/2010. Reserved on: Decided on:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FAO.No.374/2010 Reserved on:15.02.2011 Decided on: 23.02.2011 ASHA SEHGAL & ORS. Appellant Through: Mr. A P S Ahluwalia, Sr.Advocate
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 27, 2015 % Judgment Delivered on: December 01, CM(M) 1155/2015.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 27, 2015 % Judgment Delivered on: December 01, 2015 + CM(M) 1155/2015 PURAN CHAND Through:... Petitioner Mr.Arun Kumar and Mr.Udit
More information*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE. Versus
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.807/2008. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD & ANR. Petitioner Through: Mr Prem Kumar and Mr Sharad C.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: 07.03.2012 I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No.1674/2011 SURENDRA KUMAR GUPTA Through Mr. J.S. Mann, Adv....
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl. M.C. No. 377/2010 & Crl. M.A. 1296/2010. Reserved on:18th May, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Crl. M.C. No. 377/2010 & Crl. M.A. 1296/2010 Reserved on:18th May, 2011 Decided on: 8th July, 2011 JAGMOHAN ARORA... Petitioner
More informationMatter received by way of transfer. It be checked and
Thomson Press (India) vs. M/s. Khemka Containers Ltd. CS No. 481/16/2002 registered. Matter received by way of transfer. It be checked and None for the plaintiff. Sh. Bhanwar Lal Prajapati, AR of the defendant.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR INJUNCTION Date of Judgment: RSA No.55/2009 & CM No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR INJUNCTION Date of Judgment: 06.04.2011 RSA No.55/2009 & CM No.6268/2009 NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Through: Mr.Arjun Pant, Advocate...Appellant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.365 /2008 DATE OF DECISION : 10th February, 2012 VERSUS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.365 /2008 DATE OF DECISION : 10th February, 2012 SHRI VIJAY KUMAR Through: Appellant in person.... Appellant VERSUS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Judgment reserved on Judgment delivered on
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Judgment reserved on 06.07.2012 Judgment delivered on 09.07.2012 RFA 669/2003 M/S FIITJEE LTD. AND ANR. Appellants Versus DR. KANWAL
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(OS) No. 684/2004 % 8 th December, versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No. 684/2004 % 8 th December, 2015 RAJESH @ RAJ CHAUDHARY AND ORS.... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Manish Vashisth and Ms. Trisha Nagpal, Advocates. versus
More informationNATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 788 of 2018
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI (Arising out of Order dated 10 th October, 2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Kolkata Bench, Kolkata, in C.P.
More informationCS(COMM) 49/2017 Page 1 of 7
$~3. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 49/2017 & IA No.885/2017 (U/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC). VEEKESY RUBBER INDUSTRIES PVT LTD... Plaintiff Through: Dr. Sheetal Vohra, Mr. Sridharan R. Ram
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. MAC App. No. 453 of Judgment reserved on:25th November, Judgment delivered on: 2nd December, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 1. Smt. Rani W/o Late Shri Jai Kumar Mittal SUBJECT : Motor Vehicle Act,1988 MAC App. No. 453 of 2008 Judgment reserved on:25th November, 2008 Judgment delivered
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION. Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.4998/2012 in CS(OS) No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Judgment pronounced on: 10.04.2012 I.A. No.4998/2012 in CS(OS) No.136/2009 SUGANDHA SETHI...Plaintiff Through: Ms. N.Shoba with Mr.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Dated of Reserve: July 21, Date of Order : September 05, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Dated of Reserve: July 21, 2008 Date of Order : September 05, 2008 CM(M) No.819/2007 Rajiv Sud...Petitioner Through: Mr. Ravi Gupta
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, CM(M) 374/2008 with CM Nos. 4286/2008 and 13305/2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 CM(M) 374/2008 with CM Nos. 4286/2008 and 13305/2008 Reserved on : March 04, 2009 Date of Decision : March 17th, 2009 POONAM
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION. CM(M) No. 932/2007 and CM(M) No. 938/2007 RESERVED ON: 4.12.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION CM(M) No. 932/2007 and CM(M) No. 938/2007 RESERVED ON: 4.12.2007 DATE OF DECISION: 7.12.2007 Arti Arora... Through: Petitioner Mr.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Judgment delivered on: CS(OS) 2318/2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Judgment delivered on: 14.08.2012 CS(OS) 2318/2006 MR. CHETAN DAYAL Through: Ms Yashmeet Kaur, Adv.... Plaintiff versus MRS. ARUNA MALHOTRA
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision: WP(C) No. 416 of 2011 and CM Nos /2011. Versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 21.01.2011 + WP(C) No. 416 of 2011 and CM Nos.839-840/2011 DINESH KUMAR & ANR. PETITIONERS Through: Mr.S.N.Khanna, Advocate Versus DELHI COOPERATIVE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No. 20007 OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.16749 of 2010) Anil Kumar Singh...Appellant(s) VERSUS Vijay Pal Singh &
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION. Judgment Reserved on: Judgment Pronounced on:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION Judgment Reserved on: 31.03.2011 Judgment Pronounced on: 06.04.2011 IA No. 4427/2011 in CS(OS) No. 669/2011 TANU GOEL & ANR... Plaintiff
More information$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI M/S. KALPAMRIT AYURVED PVT. Through None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN O R D E R %
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI #21 + CS(COMM) 47/2018 PATANJALI AYURVED LIMITED... Plaintiff Through Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Simarnjit Singh, Mr. Siddharth Mahajan, Mr. Saurabh
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.5517 OF 2007
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5517 OF 2007 Nadiminti Suryanarayan Murthy(Dead) through LRs..Appellant(s) VERSUS Kothurthi Krishna Bhaskara Rao &
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL Nos OF Surat Singh (Dead).Appellant(s) VERSUS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL Nos.9118-9119 OF 2010 Surat Singh (Dead).Appellant(s) VERSUS Siri Bhagwan & Ors. Respondent(s) J U D G M E N T Abhay Manohar
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + Date of Decision: % RSA 417/2015 & C.M. Nos /2015. versus.
$~26. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision: 04.12.2015 % RSA 417/2015 & C.M. Nos.29313-14/2015 SHIV KUMAR... Appellant Through: Mr. Anil Sehgal, Mr. Om Prakash and Mr. Lalit Kumar
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE B E F O R E THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA WRIT PETITION NOS & 17437/2013 (GM-CPC)
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 16 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2013 B E F O R E THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA WRIT PETITION NOS.17117 & 17437/2013 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: Sri
More informationCIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP(C) No of 2016) MOHD. SAHID AND OTHERS.Appellants VERSUS J U D G M E N T
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10379 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 8586 of 2016) MOHD. SAHID AND OTHERS.Appellants VERSUS RAZIYA KHANAM (D)
More information* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. + I.A. Nos /2007 & 5651/2009 in CS(OS) No. 829/2002
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI + I.A. Nos. 14472/2007 & 5651/2009 in CS(OS) No. 829/2002 % Judgment reserved on : April 29, 2009 Judgment pronounced on : 1 st July, 2009 NATIONAL HORTICULTURE BOARD...
More information[ORDERS (INCOMPLETE MATTERS / IAs / CRLMPs)]
SNo. Case No. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA [ IT WILL BE APPRECIATED IF THE LEARNED ADVOCATES ON RECORD DO NOT SEEK ADJOURNMENT IN THE MATTERS LISTED BEFORE ALL THE COURTS IN THE CAUSE LIST ] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NOS OF 2011 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos of 2011)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4912-4913 OF 2011 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 3157-3158 of 2011) REPORTABLE Ramrameshwari Devi and Ors. Appellants Versus Nirmala
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. FAO (OS) No.178/2008. Judgment Reserved on : 30th September, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FAO (OS) No.178/2008 Judgment Reserved on : 30th September, 2008 Judgment pronounced on : 9th January, 2009 Ms. Jyotika Kumar...
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(COMM) Nos.421/2016 & 424/2016. % 28 th November, M/s VYSYA LEASING & FINANCE LTD.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) Nos.421/2016 & 424/2016 % 28 th November, 2017 1. CS(COMM) No.421/2016 M/S VYSYA LEASING & FINANCE LTD.... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Vidit Gupta, Advocate
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6850 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP(Civil)No.19027 of 2018 @ Diary No.18927 of 2018) PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 &
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No.458/2008. Date of decision: 3rd December, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No.458/2008 Date of decision: 3rd December, 2008 MUKESH KUMAR DECD. THR. LR'S and ANR.... Appellants Through: Mr.K.G.Chhokar,
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + ARB.A. 5/2015 & IA 2340/2015 (for stay) versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.A. 5/2015 & IA 2340/2015 (for stay) Judgment reserved on February 05, 2015 Judgment delivered on February 13, 2015 M/S VARUN INDUSTRIES LTD & ORS... Appellants
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No. 576/2006 % 16 th September, 2015 CHATTAR SINGH MATHAROO Through:... Plaintiff Mr. J.M.Kalia, Advocate. versus ASHWANI MUDGIL & ORS. Through:... Defendants
More information#1 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. MR RAJBIR ORS... Defendant Through: Ex Parte
#1 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 222/2016 TATA SONS LIMITED Through:... Plaintiff Ms. Geetanjali Visvanathan with Ms. Asavari Jain, Advocates versus MR RAJBIR JINDAL @ ORS...
More informationEXECUTION PROCEEDINGS FEW POINTS ON LIMITATION TO REMEMBER. Auction Purchase under Order 21 rule 95 CPC
EXECUTION PROCEEDINGS FEW POINTS ON LIMITATION TO REMEMBER For delivery of possession by Court Auction Purchase under Order 21 rule 95 CPC For enforcement of a decree granting Mandatory Injunction under
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No.95/2010. DATE OF DECISION : 17th January, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No.95/2010 DATE OF DECISION : 17th January, 2012 SANT RAM MANGAT RAM JEWELLERS Through: Ms. Sumita Kapil, Advocate.... Appellant
More information$~9. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % RSA 228/2015 and C.M. No.12883/2015. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
$~9. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision: 03.09.2015 % RSA 228/2015 and C.M. No.12883/2015 SHRI BABU LAL Through: Mr. V. Shukla, Advocate.... Appellant versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION Judgment reserved on : 26.04.2011 Judgment delivered on : 28.04.2011 R.S.A.No. 109/2007 & CM No. 5092/2007 RAMESH PRAKASH
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.5177 OF Vijay A. Mittal & Ors..Appellant(s) VERSUS
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5177 OF 2009 Vijay A. Mittal & Ors..Appellant(s) VERSUS Kulwant Rai (Dead) Thr. LRs. & Anr. Respondent(s) J U D G M
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.51/2012 DATE OF DECISION : 17th May, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.51/2012 DATE OF DECISION : 17th May, 2012 MS. KRITI KOHLI Through: Mr. Rao Balvir Singh, Advocate... Appellant VERSUS
More information$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 19 th September, CM(M) 592/2016. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R.
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 19 th September, 2016 + CM(M) 592/2016 TAZUDDIN ANSARI & ORS Through:... Petitioners Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sharma, Adv. CM(M) 592-2016 Page
More informationTHE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRP 17 of 2017
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) 1. KANHAIYA LAL KANKANI CRP 17 of 2017 2. SMT. RAJ KUMARI KANKANI..Petitioners -Versus- 1. AMBIKA SUPPLY AND SERVICES
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION RSA No. 80/2009 DATE OF DECISION : 20th January, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION RSA No. 80/2009 DATE OF DECISION : 20th January, 2014 PUSHPA RANI & ORS. Through: Mr. Subhash Chand, Advocate...Appellants. VERSUS
More information$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 64/2018 & I.A. 927/2015. Versus GRASIM ELECTRICALS AND. Through Ex parte
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 64/2018 & I.A. 927/2015 GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED... Plaintiff Through: Mr.Ajay Sahni with Ms.Kritika Sahni, Advocates. Versus GRASIM ELECTRICALS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Judgment reserved on : Judgment delivered on :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment reserved on : 29.01.2015. Judgment delivered on : 04.02.2015 CS(OS) 666/2008 JOHN NAGAR Plaintiff Through Plaintiff with
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No. 581/2003. DATE OF DECISION : 13th March, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No. 581/2003 DATE OF DECISION : 13th March, 2012 M/S B.R.METAL CORPN. & ORS. Appellants Through : Mr. A.K. Singla, Sr. Advocate
More informationThrough : Mr.P.V.Kapur, Sr.Advocate with Mr.V.K.Nagrath, Mr.Abhay Varma & Mr.Sidhant Kapur, Advocates.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY RESERVED ON : 27th NOVEMBER, 2014 DECIDED ON : 11th DECEMBER, 2014 CS (OS) 1980/2011 & CC No.21/2012 SHIV SHAKTI MADAN... Plaintiff Through
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: Versus CORAM :- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 15.10.2015 + RFA 563/2015 NITIN JAIN...APPELLANT Versus GEETA RAHEJA...RESPONDENT ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE: For the Appellant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PERPETUAL, MANDATORY INJUNCTION. Date of Judgment: CM(M) No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PERPETUAL, MANDATORY INJUNCTION Date of Judgment: 14.02.2012 CM(M) No.557/2008 DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LTD. Through: Mr. D.K. Malhotra, Advocate....
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956 Date of Judgment: W.P.(C) 8432/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956 Date of Judgment:20.3.2013 W.P.(C) 8432/2011 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK... Petitioner Through: Mr.Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ashim
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI. Vs. Respondent: Sandeep Gullah
MANU/DE/0153/2012 Equivalent Citation: 2012(127)DRJ743, 2012(49)PTC440(Del) Hon'ble Judges/Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manmohan Singh Relied On IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IA No. 17230/2011 & IA No. 17646/2011
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO.3777 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP (C) No of 2014]
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3777 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP (C) No.13256 of 2014] Sucha Singh Sodhi (D) Thr. LRs... Appellant(s) Versus Baldev
More informationF-19 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Ishanki Gupta, Advocate. versus.
F-19 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 2982/2015 MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Ishanki Gupta, Advocate. versus SUDHANSHU KUMAR & ANR. Through: None... Defendants
More information*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +CM Nos.7694-95/2010 (for restoration of CM No.266/2010 and for condonation of delay in applying for the same) in W.P.(C) 4165/2000 % Date of decision: 3 rd June,
More informationJUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Test Case No. 01 OF 2003 Smt. Gita Mukherjee Appellant -Versus- Smt. Purnima Mukherjee and another..respondents BEFORE
More informationEXECUTION OF DECREES. 2. Duty of executing court in case of dispute regarding payment of decretal
1 EXECUTION OF DECREES. S.S. Upadhyay Legal Advisor to Governor UP, Lucknow Mobile : 9453048988 E-mail : ssupadhyay28@gmail.com 1. Executing Court not to alter the mode of execution directed by court passing
More information$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.APP. 798/2010 Date of Decision: 18 th January, 2016 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD... Appellant Through Mr. Abhishek K. Gola and Mr. C K Gola, Adv.
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment Pronounced on: versus -...Respondent
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on: 19.01.2011 + Test.Cas. 75/2008 Smt. Geeta Devi Goel.. Petitioner - versus - State...Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: RSA No.46/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: 10.3.2011 RSA No.46/2011 VIRENDER KUMAR & ANR. Through: Mr.Atul Kumar, Advocate...Appellants Versus JASWANT RAI
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No(s) OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP(C)No(s) OF 2016)
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No(s). 10062-10064 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP(C)No(s).34745-34747 OF 2016) GOPAL NAGAR COOPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER W.P. (C) No. 135/1997 Reserved on: 18th July, 2012 Decided on: 23rd July, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER W.P. (C) No. 135/1997 Reserved on: 18th July, 2012 Decided on: 23rd July, 2012 M/S SUNDERLAL JAIN CHARITABLE HOSPITAL... Petitioner Through:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment reserved on: 15.03.2011 Judgment delivered on: 18.03.2011 RSA No.243/2006 & CM No.10268/2006 SHRI.D.V. SINGH & ANR...Appellants
More information$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. % Date of Decision: 06 th November, 2017 J U D G M E N T
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 563/2017 MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED... Plaintiff Through: Ms.Ishanki Gupta with Mr.Harsh Vardhan, Advocates. versus SHAM LAL & ORS Through: None...
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an appeal against the judgment of the Civil Appellate High Court of Mt. Lavinia 1. Shelton Upali Paul 1 st Plaintiff-Respondent-Respondent-
More informationStay on Execution: When & How
Stay on Execution: When & How by Rakesh Kumar Singh ************** Decade is a normal time period if one is to ask a plaintiff of a civil suit more particularly he who wants to get the possession of his
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 2/2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8398/2013
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 2/2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8398/2013 YATINDER KUMAR AGGARWAL & ORS. PETITIONER(S) VERSUS MUKUND
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2005 J U D G M E N T
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5514 OF 2005 Ganeshi (D) through LRs & Ors... Appellants -versus- Ashok & Anr... Respondents J U D G M E N T Markandey
More information$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + IA 16973/2013 in CC 50/2013 in CS(OS) 626/2012. versus
$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + IA 16973/2013 in CC 50/2013 in CS(OS) 626/2012 Date of Reserve: April 07, 2015 Date of Decision:July 31, 2015 JASBIR SINGH LAMBA & ORS... Plaintiffs Through
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Date of Decision: 11 th March, 2010
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.1702/2010 Date of Decision: 11 th March, 2010 PAVITRA GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.... Petitioner Through: Mr. L.B. Rai & Mr. Rajeev Kumar Rai, Advocates
More information$~4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:- 11 th April, 2018
$~4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:- 11 th April, 2018 + CM (M) 283/2016 M/S KHUSHI RAM BEHARI LAL... Petitioner Through: Mr. S.K. Bansal, Mr. Vinay Kumar Shukla & Mr. Ajay Amitabh
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE LPA 776 OF 2012, CMs No. 19869/2012 (stay), 19870/2012 (additional documents), 19871/2012 (delay) Judgment Delivered on 29.11.2012
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA(OS) No. 70/2008. Reserved on : December 12th, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA(OS) No. 70/2008 Reserved on : December 12th, 2008 Date of Decision : December 19th, 2008 Smt. Amarjit Kaur and Ors.... Appellants
More information$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15 th February, CS(OS) 3324/2014
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15 th February, 2019. + CS(OS) 3324/2014 DEEPA BHURE & ORS... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, Advocate (9810270050) and petitioner
More information1. Issue notice. Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of Defendant No.1;
$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 790/2009 Date of decision: 19.04.2010. GREEN DELHI BQS LTD... Plaintiff Through : Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Megha Mukherjee, Advocates,
More informationITEM NO.10 COURT NO.3 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.3 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) NO(S). 16087/2017 (ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS OF :Versus:
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NOS.9078-9079 OF 2017 Rani & Ors. :Versus: Appellant(s) National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors..Respondent(s) J U D G
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT, Judgment Reserved on: Judgment Delivered on:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932 Judgment Reserved on: 10.02.2011 Judgment Delivered on: 14.02.2011 RSA No.39/2005 & CM No.1847/2005 SHRI NARAYAN SHAMNANI
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 C.R.P. 589/1998. Date of Decision: 6th March, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 C.R.P. 589/1998 Date of Decision: 6th March, 2009 SURINDER KAUR Through: Petitioner Ms. Nandni Sahni, Advocate. versus SARDAR
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP (C) No of 2014) versus
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NO. 13361 OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 29621 of 2014) Rakesh Mohindra Anita Beri and others versus Appellant (s)
More informationThrough: Mr. Rahul Kumar Srivastava, Advocate. C.M(M) No. 211/2013. Through: Mr. Rahul Kumar Srivastava, Advocate.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CM(M) Nos. 208/2013 & 211/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 4th December, 2014 C.M(M) No. 208/2013 SUDARSHAN KUMAR JAIN Through: Mr. Rahul
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION. RFA Nos. 601/2007 and 606/2007. DATE OF DECISION 10th February, 2012.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION RFA Nos. 601/2007 and 606/2007 DATE OF DECISION 10th February, 2012 1. RFA 601/2007 SHER SINGH Through: Mr. Avadh Kaushik, Advocate....
More informationCORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW J U D G M E N T
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL.) No.807 of 2014 Reserved on: 09.07.2014 Pronounced on:16.09.2014 MANOHAR LAL SHARMA ADVOCATE... Petitioner Through: Petitioner-in-person with Ms. Suman
More information