Delhi Court November 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 117 of about 1,333 results (0.022 seconds)Shiv Kumar and anr Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:10. h November, 2014 + LPA8872013, CMs No.18573/2013 (for stay) & 12873/0214 (for filing additional affidavit) SH GHANSHYAM & ORS Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Mahipal Singh, Adv. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Joydeep Mazumdar and Mr. Rohit Dutta, Advs. for Northern Railways. AND + LPA492014, CMs No.1107/2014 (for stay) & 1109/2014 (for condonation of 20 days delay in filing the appeal) O.P. GUPTA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Mahipal Singh, Adv. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Joydeep Mazumdar and Mr. Rohit Dutta, Advs. for Northern Railways. AND + LPA762014, CMs No.1546/2014 (for stay) & 1548/2014 (for condonation of 33 days delay in filing the appeal) SHIV KUMAR & ANR Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Mahipal Singh, Adv. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Joydeep Mazumdar and Mr. Rohit Dutta, Advs. for Northern Railways. CORAM:HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTIC...
Tag this Judgment!Siemens Aktiengesellschaft and anr Vs. Siemens Solutions
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:10. h November, 2014 + CS (OS) No.1986/2013 SIEMENS AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT & ANR. Plaintiffs Through Ms. Anju Agrawal, Adv. versus SIEMENS SOLUTIONS Through ....Defendant Defendant already ex-parte CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) 1. The plaintiffs have filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of the plaintiffs well known trademark SIEMENS, misuse of the trademark SIEMENS as a trading name and rendition of accounts, damages, delivery up etc.2. Plaintiff no.1 is the registered proprietor of the trademark SIEMENS duly registered in India in class 1, 5,7,9,10,11 and 35. The plaintiff No.1 had adopted the trademark SIEMENS in the year 1847 in Germany and has a worldwide reputation.3. The Plaintiff No.2 is an Indian subsidiary of plaintiff No.1. and has spent huge sum on sales, marketing and advertisement for the trademark SIEMENS of plaintiff No.1 in India. The domain name w...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and ors. Vs. Shyam Pyare Yadav and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~28 & 29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:10. 11.2014 + W.P.(C) 7618/2014, C.M. NOS. 17952/2014 & 17953/2014 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. J.K. Singh, Advocate. versus PREM PAL SINGH ..... Respondent Through : None. + W.P.(C) 7627/2014, C.M. NOS.17970/2014 & 17971/2014 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through : Sh. J.K. Singh, Advocate. versus SHYAM PYARE YADAV & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The controversy involved in these two proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution arising from two separate orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 06.02.2014 29.05.2014 in O.A. No.3745/2012 and O.A. and No.1921/2014 respectively, is the admissibility of pension by reckoning the period of casual/temporary employment of those working in the Railways. The W.P.(C) 7618/2014 & W.P.(C) 7627/2014 Pa...
Tag this Judgment!Govind Ram Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
$~ 84(III) * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:10. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 4787/2014 & CM95342014 GOVIND RAM .... Petitioner versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Naresh Kaushik, B. Tripathy For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain, Ms Jyoti Tyagi. Mr Pawan Mathur CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) in respect of which Award No.14/87-88 dated 26.05.1987 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners land ...
Tag this Judgment!Sushil Kumar JaIn Vs. Union of India and anr
Court: Delhi
2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:10. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 5739/2014 SUSHIL KUMAR JAIN ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Anurag Parashar. For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi for LAC/L&B. Mr Dhanesh Relan and Mr Arush Bhandari for DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that this matter is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Girish Chhabra v. Lt. Governor of Delhi and Ors.: W.P.(C) 2759/2011 decided on 12.09.2014. He states that although possession of the subject land has been taken, the award under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilit...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Malik and anr Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Andors
Court: Delhi
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:10. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 4236/2014 & CM No.8507/2014 RAMESH MALIK & ANR .... Petitioners versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI &ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Mr Lalit Kumar Rawal, Advocate with Mr Ram Kumar Ranga and Mr Vishal Thakur, Advocates For the Respondents :Mr Yeeshu Jain, Advocate with Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for R-1 & R-2 Ms Mrinalini S. Gupta, Advocate with Ms Ruhi Chopra, Advocate for R-2 CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. Mr Yeeshu Jain states that the counter affidavit has been filed vide diary No.194634 dated 13.10.2014. The same be taken on record. He has, however, handed over a copy of the counter affidavit which has been filed. The copy is also taken on record.2. The petitioners seek the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquis...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Rck Developers (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India and anr
Court: Delhi
$~ 82 (Category-I) IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:10. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 4777/2014 & CM95182014 M/S RCK DEVELOPERS (P) LTD. ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Sumit Bansal, Mr Ateev Mathur, Ms Richa Oberoi. For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi for LAC/L&B. Mr Dhanesh Relan, Mr Arush Bhandari for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition the petitioner is seeking the benefit of section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioner, consequently, seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as th...
Tag this Judgment!Laxman Singh and anr. Vs. Land and Building Department and anr.Q
Court: Delhi
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:10th November, 2014 % + W.P.(C) 7677/2014 LAXMAN SINGH & ANR. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr. I.S. Gulia and Mr. Naresh K. Daksh, Advs. versus LAND & BUILDING DEPARTMENT & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. for Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Adv. for R1. Mr. Arun Birbal and Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advs. for R2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM. No.18069/2014 Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is allowed. + W.P.(C) 7677/2014 1. Vide the present petition, petitioners have assailed the communication dated 10.07.2013 of respondent No.1, whereby rejected the application of petitioner No.1 for alternative plot.2. Further seek direction thereby directing respondent No.1 to recommend the alternative plot in favour of the petitioner.3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the aforesaid land owned and possessed by ...
Tag this Judgment!Avinash Em Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Gail (India) Limited
Court: Delhi
$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB. P. 33/2014 AVINASH EM PROJECTS PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjiv Kakra, Ms. Vaishali Kakra and Mr. Varus Gowda, Advocates versus % GAIL (INDIA) LIMITED ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Parag Tripathi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pragyan Sharma, Ms. Kanika Tandon and Mr. Nitikesh Kumar, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER1011.2014 IA No.21785/2014 (Exemption) 1. Allowed subject to just exceptions. ARB. P. 33/2014 and IA No.21786/2014 (stay) 2. This is an appeal preferred against the order dated 07.11.2014, passed by the learned arbitrator. By this order, the appellants petition under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act) has been dismissed. The appellant being aggrieved, has preferred the captioned appeal.3. Briefly, the case of the appellant is that, the bank guarantees in issue, the details of which are set out at pages 443 to 446 of the documents file, pertain to thre...
Tag this Judgment!G.S. Chhabra Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
(III) THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:10. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 5679/2014 and CM No.14045/2014 G.S. CHHABRA ... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr N.S. Vasisht, Mr M.P. Bhargava, Mr Vishal Singh and Ms Jyoti Kataria For the Respondents : Mr Dhanesh Relan and Mr Arush Bhandari for R-3/DDA Mr Siddharth Panda for R-5 CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) in respect of which Award No.10/1987-88 dated 14.05.1987...
Tag this Judgment!