Delhi Court November 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 8 of about 1,333 results (0.037 seconds)Action Committee Unaided Recognized Private School Vs. Honble Lt.Gover ...
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 202/2014 FORUM FOR PROMOTION OF QUALITY EDUCATION FOR ALL ....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vedanta Varma,Advocate versus LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. P.P. Malhotra, Senior Advocate with Mr. V.K.Tandon and Mr. Yogesh Saini, Advocates for Govt. of NCT of Delhi. Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr. Prashant Ghai and Mr. Amrit Singh, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Ashok Agarwal with Ms. Nisha Tomar, Advocates for Social Jurist. WITH + W.P.(C) 177/2014 ACTION COMMITTEE UNAIDED RECOGNIZED PRIVATE SCHOOLS ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul and Mr. Rakesh Khanna, Senior Advocates with Mr. Kamal Gupta, Advocate. versus HONBLE LT.GOVERNOR & ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. P.P. Malhotra, Senior Advocate with Mr. V.K.Tandon and Mr. Yogesh Saini, Advocates for Govt. of NCT of Delhi. Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr. Prashant Ghai and Mr. Amrit Singh, Advocates for UOI. Mr. ...
Tag this Judgment!Merck Kgaa and anr. Vs. Emil Pharmaceutical Inds. Pvt. Ltd
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :13. h NOVEMBER, 2014 DECIDED ON :28. h NOVEMBER, 2014 + CS (OS) 1811/2012 MERCK KGAA AND ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through : Mr.C.M.Lall, Advocate with Mr.Anuj Nair & Mr.Nancy Roy, Advocates. VERSUS EMIL PHARMACEUTICAL INDS. PVT. LTD Through : ..... Defendant None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The plaintiffs have filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark and rendition of accounts, damages and delivery up, etc. against the defendant with the following prayers :a. A decree for permanent injunction restraining the Defendant, by himself, his servants, agents, assigns, etc. from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in pharmaceutical and medicinal preparations under the trade mark COZOLE or any other trade mark identical, deceptively and/or confusingly similar to the trademark COSOME so as to infringe plaintiffs trademark regis...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish Singh Bhatia Vs. the Secretary, Land and Building Deptt. (Alte ...
Court: Delhi
$~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h November, 2014 + W.P.(C) No.8261/2014 JAGDISH SINGH BHATIA Represented by: ..... Petitioner Ms. Jyoti Bajaj, Advocate. Versus THE SECRETARY, LAND & BUILDING DEPTT. (ALTERNATIVE CELL) ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Yeeshu Jain and Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM No.19194/2014 (for exemption) Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is allowed. W.P.(C) 8261/2014 1. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner seeks directions thereby directing the respondent to allot an alternative plot to the petitioner in lieu of the acquired land.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioners land was acquired by the respondent and award thereto was passed on 11.11.1985. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for allotment of an alternative plot vide application dated 25.07.1986, however, till d...
Tag this Judgment!Obinna Basil Anaebo @ Emmanuel Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 434/2014 OBINNA BASIL ANAEBO @ EMMANUEL ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Sumi Anand and Mr. Arvinder Singh, Advocates. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. P.K. Mishra, APP for the State with SI Sanjiv, PS Crime Branch. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) Crl. A. 434/2014 & Crl. M.B. 737/2014 and Crl. M.A. 18414/2014 1. The aforesaid appeal was admitted for hearing by this Court on 4th April, 2014 and the matter was directed to be listed in the week commencing 25th August, 2014 in the category of Regulars. Since the main appeal itself had been listed for final hearing on a fixed date, consequently, the prayer of the appellant for suspension of sentence was declined at that stage and it was further directed that in case the matter is not heard on that date then the appellants application for suspension of sentence will be considered.2. The present appeal has not been taken up for fin...
Tag this Judgment!Mamta Rani Vs. Sudhir Sharma
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 28, 2014 + MAT.APP. 121/2010 MAMTA RANI Through: ..... Appellant Mr. G.C.Shukla, Advocate versus SUDHIR SHARMA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. A.K.Sharma, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Vide impugned judgment of 14th September, 2010, marriage of appellant with respondent has been declared to be nullity, as the material fact of mental illness of appellant-wife was concealed from respondenthusband. The factual background of this case already stands noticed in the opening paragraphs of the impugned judgment and needs no reiteration. Suffice it would be to note that the parties were married on 19 th April, 2007 but their marriage could not be consummated on the first night due to abnormal behavior of appellant-wife and within few months it became known that appellant-wife was suffering from mental disorder i.e. bipolar disorder alongwith seizures since the year 1998 and was under constant m...
Tag this Judgment!Harish Relan Vs. Kaushal Kumari Relan and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order delivered on:28. h November, 2014 % + I.A. No.8296/2014 & I.A. No.2022/2014 in CS(OS) No.724/2006 HARISH RELAN Through .....Plaintiff Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Adv. with Mr.K.L.Nandwani & Mr.Manish Kaushik, Advs. versus KAUSHAL KUMARI RELAN AND ORS. ..Defendants Through Mr.Vivek Singh, Adv. for D-1 to 4. Mr.Sunil Mittal, Adv. for D-6 & 7. Mr.Ajay Kapur, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Harshbir Singh Kohli, Mr.Dinesh Kumar & Mr.Anish Roy, Advs. for D-8. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. In The Mahabharata, Book 12: Santi Parva: Mokshadharma Parva: Section CCLXVI at p. 248, Bhishma said: "..... The mother is as the fire-stick with respect to the bodies of all men. She is the panacea for all kinds of calamities. The existence of the mother invests one with protection; the reverse deprives one of all protection....Able or disabled, lean or robust, the son is always protected by the mother....There is no shelter (protection against the s...
Tag this Judgment!Narcotics Control Bureau Vs. Chen Ching Sung
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. No.1267 of 2014 Reserved on:20. h November 2014 Decision on:28. h November 2014 NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Subhash Bansal with Mr. Shashwat, Advocates. versus CHEN CHING SUNG ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Nikita Sharma, Advocate with Respondent in person. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2811.2014 1. This appeal by Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) is directed against the judgment dated 31st May 2012 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS in SC No.8 of 2009 acquitting the Respondent of the offence under Sections 22 and 23 of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). The case of the prosecution 2. The case of the prosecution is that Mr. R.R. Kumar (PW-7) Superintendent, NCB, received a secret information on 11 th October 2008 that the Respondent, a Taiwanese national, was likely to board a Malaysian Airlines for Kuala Lumpur that very night with a huge quantity of Methamphetamine (Met...
Tag this Judgment!Adesh Tyagi and ors. Vs. Consolidation Officer (North) and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h November, 2014 + W.P.(C) No.8284/2014 ADESH TYAGI & ORS. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.Anuroop P.S. and Mr. Deepak Khosla, Advocates. Versus CONSOLIDATION OFFICER (NORTH) & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. V.K.Tandon and Mr. Amiet Andley, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Vide the present petition, the petitioners have assailed the order dated 15.07.2014 passed by the Financial Commissioner in Case No.353/2011, titled as Shri Adesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs.CO Norhty & Ors, whereby the Financial Commissioner passed the following order:- 2.1. Heard the Counsels for both the sides in detail.2. I find that Counsel for Petitioners is not able to establish that there is any deficiency in his allotment during the consolidation. Hence, the petition is dismissed. Needless to state that the aforementioned order is not reasoned, hence the same is hereby quashed.3. Accordingly...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Kumar Vs. Union Public Service Commission and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~19 & 23. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:28. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 8319/2014 & CM APPL. 19276-19280/2014 SATISH KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Amit S Chadha, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mohit Bakshi, Advocate versus UNION PUBLIC SERVICES COMMISSION & ANR.... Respondent Through: Mr. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC with Mr. Waize Ali Noor, Advocate Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Ms. Aditi Gupta and Ms. Amita Kalkal Chaudhary, Adv. for UPSC % W.P.(C) 8373/2014 & CM APPL. 19386-19389/2014 RITWIK RAJ SAXENA Through: .... Petitioner Mr. Debesh Panda, Ms. Amrita Panda and Ms. Shweta Sharma, Advocates versus UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ANR...... Respondent Through: Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC Mr. Naresh Kaushik Ms. Aditi Gupta and Ms. Amita Kalkal Chaudhary, Adv. for UPSC CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. These petitioners claim to be aggrieved by a common order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT/ Tribuna...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. K.S.Sidhu Vs. the Registrar, Indian Council of Arbitration
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 28, 2014 + RSA3652014 & CM Nos.19550-19551/2014 DR. K.S.SIDHU ..... Appellant Through: In person with Ms. Maldeep Sidhu, Advocate versus THE REGISTRAR, INDIAN COUNCIL OF ARBITRATION Through: None ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % A suit for recovery of `5,02,500/- with interest and costs stood decreed by the concerned Additional District Judge against respondent herein who had challenged the judgment and decree of 4 th June, 2013 of trial court by way of Regular First Appeal No.341/2013, which has been allowed and the cross objections of appellant herein have been dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court vide impugned judgment of 8 th January, 2014. This Second Appeal has been preferred against the said judgment of 8th January, 2014. At the outset, learned counsel for appellant herein had submitted that this second appeal lies before a Division Bench of this Court and ha...
Tag this Judgment!