Delhi Court September 2013 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Prem Ratan Rathi and ors. Vs. Ashish Iron Trading Co. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-2013
* + THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.S (OS) Nos. 1383/2005 Date of Decision:13. 09.2013 PREM RATAN RATHI & ORS. Through: ......Plaintiffs Mr. Amarjit Singh, Ms. Vernika Tomar, Ms.Vibha Arya, Advs Versus ASHISH IRON TRADING CO. & ANR. Through: ......Defendants Ex-parte. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA M.L. MEHTA, J.1. This is a suit for permanent injunction restraining the infringement, passing off, unfair competition and dilution of the trademark RATHI, along with rendition of accounts and for destruction of all material bearing the impugned trademark/trade name.2. The case of the plaintiffs is as follows. Plaintiff No.7, Rathi Research Centre (hereinafter referred to as the trust), is a trust registered under the provisions of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882. Plaintiffs no. 1 to 6 are its trustees and they all belong to the family of late Sh. Gordhan Das Rathi. Plaintiffs no. 8 and 9 (hereinafter referred to as the companies) are two companies that are managed and controlled by...
Khushi Ram Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-2013
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5823/2013 & CM APPL. 12824/2013 KHUSHI RAM ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Pushpender Singh Dahiya, Adv. versus STATE Through ..... Respondent Ms. Ferida Satarawala, Adv. Date of Decision:13. h September, 2013. % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (Oral):1. Present writ petition has been filed primarily seeking stay of the ejectment order dated 16th April, 2013 passed by the Revenue Assistant with regard to the land in Khasra No. 37/16 situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Mubarakpur Dabas, Delhi. Since the impugned order is short one, the same is reproduced herein below: The proceedings in the case were initiated against the respondents for occupying Gram Sabha land and restrained orders were issued on 17/6/2011 to the respondents for not making unauthorized constructions on Gram Sabha land in khasra nos. 37/16 (1-01), Mubarakpur Dabas. It was also indicated in the restrained order that respondent will fil...
Madanjit Kumar Vs. Central Electronics Ltd and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) 4531/2012 13th September, 2013 % MADANJIT KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Deepak Tyagi, Adv. versus CENTRAL ELECTRONICS LTD AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rohit Jain, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner who is an employee of the respondent No.1/Central Electronics Ltd. seeks two reliefs by way of this writ petition. First relief which is claimed is the challenge to the transfer order dated 7.4.2012 transferring the petitioner from Sahibabad, UP (NCR Delhi) to Bangalore. Second relief claimed is the challenge to the suspension letter dated 8.6.2012.2. Taking the aspect of suspension first, it would be necessary to reproduce the relevant suspension letter dated 8.6.2012, and the same reads as under:Sri Madanjit Kumar, This has come into the knowledge of the Management with substantial evidences that you have been engaging yourself in ...
Amar Nath Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-2013
$-R-9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :13. h SEPTEMBER, 2013 + CRL.A. 383/2002 AMAR NATH ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Sumit Verma, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. Amar Nath (the appellant) was arrested in FIR No. 527/1997 under Sections 307/34 IPC registered at PS I.P.Estate and was sent for trial on the allegations that on 05.10.1997 at about 02.30 P.M. he committed house trespass inside jhuggi belonging to Kavinder Kumar at Jamuna Pushta, Gautam Puri after having made preparation to cause hurt. It was further alleged that he, on the exhortation of his companion Dalip Kumar, inflicted injuries to Lal Babu, Kavinder Kumar and Shatrughan with a sickle. The police machinery was set into motion when information about a quarrel at Jamuna Pushta, Gautam Puri was reported and Daily Diary (DD) No. 14-A (Ex.PW-4/A) was recorded at 02.38 P.M. The investigation was assi...
M/S. Shubham Constructions Vs. M/S. Mvd Autocomponents Pvt. Ltd. Andan ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:5th September, 2013 Date of Decision:13. h September, 2013 % + CO.PET. 322/2012 & Co.Appl.1538/2013 M/S. SHUBHAM CONSTRUCTIONS ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Satyarthi with Mr. Raman Gandhi and Mr. Rahul Gola, Advocates. versus M/S. MVD AUTOCOMPONENTS PVT. LTD. &ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sumit Bansal with Ms. Sumi Anand, Advocates. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR JUDGMENT R.V. EASWAR, J.: This is a petition filed by M/s Shubham Constructions hereinafter referred to as the petitioner, under section 433(e) read with section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking winding up of M/s MVD Autocomponents Pvt. Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the respondent.2. The petitioner is a proprietary firm engaged in the business of construction. The respondent is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. It manufactures and exports auto electrical switches, sensors, plugs etc. for passenger cars, commercial vehicles, earthmoving m...
Rajesh Dubey Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 533/2012 & Crl.M.A. No. 4340/2012 Date of Decision:13. h September, 2013 RAJESH DUBEY Through ..... Petitioner Mr. C.M. Maini and Mr. Arvind Dhingra, Advocates versus STATE & ORS. Through ..... Respondent Mr. Dayan Krishnan, ASC for State Mr. Mohit Mathur, Mr. Rajeev Goyal and Mr. Ujjwal K. Jha, Advocates for R-2. Mr. R.C. Tiwari, Advocate for R-3. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT :SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Whether the learned Additional Session Judge, in exercise of his jurisdiction u/s 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, the `Court) can pass an order in the absence of accused in the facts and circumstances of the case is the question involved in this writ petition which arises out of an order dated 27.02.2012 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge in criminal revision No.26/2012.2. Before adverting to the said question, it will be relevant to note the admitted facts. Respondent no.1 is a company in...
Pioneer India Electronics (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on :29. h July, 2013 th Judgment pronounced on:13. September, 2013 + W.P.(C) 5120/2011 PIONEER INDIA ELECTRONICS (P) LTD. ..... Petitioner Through versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi, Senior Advocate with Mr.S.K.Dubey, Mr.Zeeshan Khan and Ms.Anuradha Salhotra, Advocates ..... Respondents Ms.Sonia Sharma, Adv for Union of India. Mr.Anshuman Chowdhury, Advocate for R-2 CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the Circular No.23/2010-Customs dated 29.7.2010 and the notification No. 93/2008-Customs dated 1.8.2008. The petitioner further prays for setting aside of the orders dated 21.3.2011 and 27.4.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) relying on the ======================================================================= impugned Circular No. 23/2010-Customs dated 29.7.2010 and fu...
Harinder Pal Kaur Vs. Director Establishment W/C Dda and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.5824/2013 % HARINDER PAL KAUR Through:13. h September , 2013 ......Petitioner Mr. Sunil Kumar, Adv. VERSUS DIRECTOR ESTABLISHMENT W/C DDA & ANR. Through: ...... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. In RSA 182/2010 titled as Delhi Development Authority Vs. Khem Singh & Ors. the following order was passed on 10.2.2012.1. After arguments, it is agreed by the parties that the impugned judgments be set aside, however, counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs states that his clients/respondents/plaintiffs are covered by the exception created in para 53 of the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi, 2006 (4) SCC 1.2. Counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs states that his clients were qualified and sanctioned posts were available. It is argued that, in fact, there were further promot...
Pt. Kanahya Lal Dayawanti Punj Charitable Society Vs. N.S. Bhatia and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-2013
$~S-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 924/2004 % Judgment dated 13.09.2013 PT. KANAHYA LAL DAYAWANTI PUNJ CHARITABLE SOCIETY Through: Mr.S.C. Singhal, Advocate ..... Plaintiff versus N.S. BHATIA & ORS. Through: FB+ Mr.Rishi Kapoor, Advocate ..... Defendant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) IA.No.15333/2012 & Review Petition No.475/2012 1. Plaintiff seeks review of the order dated 19.4.2012 passed in I.A.No.1251/2010 (filed by defendant Nos.1 to6) in the suit. Application has also been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, seeking condonation of 88 days delay in filing the review petition. The review petition and the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common order. The grounds set out in this application seeking condonation of delay are that the order dated 19.4.2012 passed by this Court was not brought to the notice of the review petitioner by their counsel. It is...
Indian Heritage Society and anr Vs. Meher Malhotra and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:13. h September, 2013 + CS(OS) 2717/2011 and IA Nos. 17445/2011, 17787/2011 & 15091/2012 INDIAN HERITAGE SOCIETY & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr. Pravin Anand and Ms.Tanvi Misra, Advocate versus MEHER MALHOTRA & ANR ..... Defendants Through Mr. Vikram Dogra, Mr.Samrat Nigam and Ms. Ankita Mahajan, Advocate for D-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs and defendant No.1 submit that the parties, namely, plaintiffs and defendant No.1 have settled the matter. It is agreed that the injunction granted by this Court on 04.11.2011 will continue against defendant No.1. Accordingly, defendant No.1 shall abide by the said direction. Suit qua defendant No.1 is disposed of in these terms. The plaintiff does not press any other relief against defendant No.1.2. Regarding defendant No.2, the plaintiffs have filed an affidavit of service stating that she has been served by e-mail....
- ‹ Prev
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- Next ›
- Last »