Advanced Search Results

Charanjit Thukral and anr. Vs Deepak Thukral and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Advocate for Appellant : Mr.Muneesh Malhotra, Mr. Yogender Pradhan, Advs.

(1) Whether reporters of local paper may be allowed to see the judgment?(2) To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes (3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes1. Vide this order...

Aneeta Hada Vs. Godfather Travels and Tours.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138; Information Technology Act, 2000 - Section 85, 141, 67; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Section 292; Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) 1973 - Section 482

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Muneesh Malhotra

DIPAK MISRA, J.1.In Criminal Appeal Nos. 838 of 2008 and 842 of 2008, the common proposition of law that has emerged for consideration is whether an authorised signatory of a company would be liable for prosecution...

Kapri Intl Pvt Ltd Vs. ----

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:27th November, 2012 % + CO.PET. 59/1994 IN THE MATTER OF KAPRI INTL. PVT. LTD. Through ..... Petitioner Ms. Meenakshi Singh, Adv. for the...

Mona Nanda vs.state Nct of Delhi & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Muneesh Malhotra, Ms. Petitioner Manpreet Kaur

$~18. * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI TEST.CAS. 89/2019 MONA NANDA Through: Mr. Muneesh Malhotra and Ms. ........ Petitioner Manpreet Kaur, Advs. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. STATE NCT OF DELHI...

S.D.Hada Vs. PravIn Kumar Aggarwal

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Muneesh Malhotra

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % EFA-12/2013 13th November , 2014 S.D.HADA Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Muneesh Malhotra, Adv. VERSUS PRAVIN KUMAR AGGARWAL Through: ...... Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI...

M/S Anukampa Solutions Private Ltd Vs. Uttar Pradesh State Road Transp ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Mr. Muneesh Malhotra

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 113/2010 M/S ANUKAMPA SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Muneesh Malhotra, Advocate. versus UTTAR PRADESH STATE ROAD...

Sanjeev Gupta Vs. Sanjay Anand

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Anuj Jain

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4385/2013 and CRL.M.A. 15684/2013 Date of decision :27. h November, 2013 % SANJEEV GUPTA Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. Anuj Jain, Adv. versus SANJAY ANAND...

M/S Planet Colors Eco Townships Ltd. Vs. State Bank of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Muneesh Malhotra, Mr. Achin Mittal

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:1. t July, 2014 % + LPA No.395/2014 M/S PLANET COLORS ECO TOWNSHIPS LTD. ….. Appellant Through: Mr. Muneesh Malhotra with Mr. Achin Mittal, Advs....

S.D.Hada Vs. PravIn Kumar Aggarwal

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Muneesh Malhotra

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % EFA-12/2013 13th November , 2014 S.D.HADA Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Muneesh Malhotra, Adv. VERSUS PRAVIN KUMAR AGGARWAL Through: ...... Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI...

Gurdeep Singh Dau and Others Vs. Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Commit ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226; Delhi Sikh Gurudwaras Act, 1971 - Sections 2, 3, 5, 4, 15, 16, 31, 32 and 32; Gujarat University Act; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 19 and 21 - Rules 8, 9, 10 and 12

Reported in : AIR1995Delhi182; ILR1995Delhi460

Advocate for Appellant : Mukul Rohtagi and; Rajiv K. Garg, Advs

ORDERD. P. Wadhwa, J.1. This, it wouldappear, is the second round of litigation. The first (CWP No. 2630/ 94) was dismissed on 26 July 1994 principally on the ground that the Court was not satisfied about...