Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.47 seconds)
Documents citing Smt Ranjana Gupta vs Rajnesh Gupta & Ors on 11 February, 2014

Smt. Vinita Gupta vs . Rajesh Gupta & Ors. on 19 May, 2014

FINDINGS ON ISSUE NO.1 7 The onus to prove the issue was on the petitioners. Considering the fact that the present petition was under Section 163­ A of Motor Vehicles Act 1988, therefore petitioners were only required to establish on record that the accident had taken place due Page no. 12 of 3 4 Smt. Vinita Gupta Vs. Rajesh Gupta & Ors. to ''involvement'' of the offending vehicle / "use" of vehicle bearing Registration No. DL­4S­ BH­5889 as the aspect of ''negligence'' is not required to be proved.
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sh Gaurav Ohri vs Smt Manjali Ohri on 13 April, 2023

Similarly, in the matter of Ranjana Gupta(Supra), the residence order was declined as the wife therein, being a government servant, was drawing HRA from her department, which is not the case herein. Upon specific inquiry by this Court, respondent/wife has specifically claimed that she is not drawing any HRA. Appellant has failed to point out any contradictory material available on record to discredit the claim of the respondent. Furthermore,one should not lose sight of the fact that this is an interim order and the parties can always approach the courts for redressal of their grievances if they come across any CA No.04/2021 Gaurav Ohri & Anr. Vs Manjali Ohri Page No.6/8 contradictory material.
Delhi District Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1