Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (7.26 seconds)
Documents citing Anil Kumar Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh 31 Mcrc/530/2019 ... on 7 February, 2019

Anil vs Akash Deep on 17 November, 2025

DL11K3843 (hereinafter "offending vehicle") and sustained grievous injuries, while he along with his relative Arun was crossing the road near Punjabi Bagh Metro Station, Rohtak Road. The offending vehicle was being driven by respondent no.1 in rash and negligent manner, without blowing horn. After the accident, injured was shifted to Acharya Bikshu Hospital where concerned doctors prepared the MLC bearing No. 13003/2022. Thereafter, due to critical condition, the injured was shifted to Khetrapal Hospital at Bali Nagar, Ramesh Nagar. On his statement, FIR No. 560/2022 u/s 279/337/338 IPC PS Punjabi Bagh was registered against the respondent no.1. The petitioner spent Rs.2,50,000/- on his medical treatment. The petitioner was 40 years of age at the time of accident and was working as Anil vs. Akash Deep & Ors.
Delhi District Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

In Matter Of "Krishna Janardhan Bhat vs . Dattatraya G. Hegde" (2008) 4 on 29 August, 2019

9. It stands established on record in the form of evidence of the complainant given vide affidavit (which can be read in evidence at all stages as per judgment of "Rajesh Agarwal Vs. State & Anr." 171 (2010) DELHI LAW TIMES 5, documents exhibited in evidence, admission of accused during accusations explained to him and statement of accused Anil Kumar v. C. Mukesh 9 of 10 recorded under Section 313 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 281 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 that accused never received any amount as loan from the complainant as alleged. The complainant has not been able to prove that the cheque in question was for discharge of legally enforceable liability as on the date of the cheque and hence the foremost ingredients of offence punishable under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is not established.
Delhi District Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Anil Kumar vs Court Of Civil Judge (J.D.) South Room ... on 6 March, 2020

However, looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the Civil Judge Junior Division South, Room No.24, Sultanpur to make an endeavour to decide Original Suit No.307 of 2012 (Anil Kumar Vs. Ram Pratak and others) expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
Allahabad High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - R Srivastava - Full Document

Dr. Madhu Jaiswal vs M/S Delhi Provincial Motor Transport on 28 January, 2021

22. During the course of arguments, the Ld. Counsel for the respondent argued that husband of the petitioner being a qualified doctor and financial well off, is not dependent on the petitioner for her bonafide requirement. I am Eviction petition bearing E. No.08/14 (New No.-78435/16) Page 15 of 22 //16// not satisfied with the arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the respondent as in the case of "Anil Kumar Gupta Vs. Deepika Verma" RC Rev. 138/2015 dated 14.10.2015, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held the following:
Delhi District Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Surinder Kumar Kalra vs Satbir Singh on 11 June, 2025

47.Similarly, Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Anil Kumar Gupta vs Deepika Verma RC. REV. 138/2015 held "12. Customarily or in common parlance a dependent would be defined as any person who is reliant on another either for financial or physical support for sustenance of life. It is pertinent to note that the word dependent or as to what constitutes a family has nowhere been defined in the Delhi Rent Control Act. Rather, the legislators consciously and deliberately have used the words "any member of family dependent on the landlord" instead of defining a clear degree of relations so as to construe a wider meaning to the aforesaid words as man is a social creature and part of a complex societal system involving myriad of relations from which he cannot be isolated. It is significant to understand that the dependency is not restricted to financial or physical Digitally signed by AJAY SINGH RC ARC No. 238/2016. AJAY Surinder Kumar Kalra VS Satbir Singh Page 27 PARIHAR of 46 SINGH Date:
Delhi District Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next