Delhi Court November 2014 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.
Sanjeev Kumar and anr Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
$~37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5173/2014 SANJEEV KUMAR & ANR Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Kamal Nijhawan with Mr. Sumit Gaur, Advs. with petitioners in person versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. P.K. Mishra, APP for the State. SI Subodh Panwar, P.S. Harsh Vihar. Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition has been moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.49/2011 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Harsh Vihar on 27.03.2011 on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties 2. Issue notice.3. Counsel for the State enters appearance and accepts notice. The second respondent/complainant, Meena, is present in person. She is also identified by the Investigating Officer, Sub-Inspector Subodh Panwar, Police Station Harsh Vihar, who i...
Parvindar Singh Vs. M/S Senbo Engineering Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order delivered on:17. h November, 2014 % + CS(OS) No.1693/2012 & I.A. No.8692/2013 PARVINDAR SINGH ..... Plaintiff Through Mr. Ashish Pratap Singh, Adv. versus M/S SENBO ENGINEERING LTD ....Defendant Through Mr. Aloke Kr. Bhattacharya, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff has filed a suit for recovery of Rs.35,58,257/- along with pendent lite and future interest against the defendant.2. It is stated that the plaintiff is engaged in the business of civil construction doing construction in the name of S.P.Construction and Shekhawat Construction as proprietorship concerns. The defendant is engaged in the business of civil construction, doing construction works for Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC).3. Defendant was served with summons on 18th August, 2012. However, the defendant did not file the written statement and consequently, the right to file the written statement was closed vide order dated 21s...
Pooja Sharma Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-17-2014
$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of hearing and Order: November 17, 2014 + W.P.(C) 7819/2014 POOJA SHARMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. O.P. Agarwal, Mr. Jeet Ram, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC, Mr. T.P.Singh, Advocates for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI ORDER % KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(ORAL) By this petition filed under Article 226, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus or certiorari for quashing the letter dated 20.8.2014; for acceptance of the mark sheet and provisional certificate dated 12.8.2012 and 17.8.2012 respectively, for acceptance of the mark sheet dated 6th August, 2013 issued in continuation of the previous mark sheet dated 12.8.2012; and a direction to the respondents for the issuance of an appointment letter to the petitioner for the post of Assistant Sub Inspector for which she had qualified all the necessary tests and a...
M/S Dabur India Ltd. Vs. M/S Alka Ayurvedic Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2014
$~8 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No.2639/2008 M/S DABUR INDIA LTD. Through: .... Plaintiff Mr. Hemant Singh, Adv. with Ms. Mamta R. Jha, Adv. and Mr. Manish K. Mishra, Adv. versus M/S ALKA AYURVEDIC PVT. LTD. Through: .... Defendant Mr. M.K. Miglani, Adv. with Mr. Aayushmaan Gauba, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL % ORDER1411.2014 I.A. No.10059/ 2013 (Order VI Rule 17 CPC) in CS (OS) No.2639/ 2008 1. By virtue of this application under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC, the Plaintiff seeks amendment of paras 2 (ii) and 20 of the reply to preliminary submissions/ objections and para 9 of the replication.2. The dispute between the parties is with regard to infringement and passing off in respect of trademark HAJMOLA. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 17.12.2008 granted an ex-parte injunction in favour of the Plaintiff. The order was vacated on 06.10.2009 on the grounds, inter alia, that the Defendant was the registered owner of the alleg...
Manoj Chaudhary Vs. Sanjeev Bhardwaj
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 14, 2014 + RSA3392014 MANOJ CHAUDHARY Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Harish K. Mehra, Advocate versus SANJEEV BHARDWAJ Through: ..... Respondent Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % C.M. No.18610-11/2014 (for exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. Applications are disposed of. C.M. No.18612/2014 (for delay) For reasons stated in the application, delay of 55 days in re-filing the accompanying appeal is condoned. Application is disposed of. RSA No.339/2014 & C.M.No.18609/2014 Respondents suit for possession of the suit premises stands decreed by both the courts below. The factual narration of this case already finds mention in the RSA No.339/2014 Page 1 opening paragraph of the impugned judgment and so, needs no reiteration. At the hearing of the appeal, appellant-defendant had filed an application for additional evidence to show that the subject premises were located in village Sikdar...
Sh. Madan Lal Vs. Sh. Ashok Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.1132/2013 14th November, 2014 % SH. MADAN LAL Through: ......Petitioner Mr.Rajesh Gupta with Mr.Harpreet Singh, Advocates. VERSUS SH. ASHOK KUMAR ...... Respondent Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner/tenant impugning the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the Additional Rent Controller dated 01.4.2013 and the Rent Control Tribunal/first appellate court dated 28.9.2013; which have passed an eviction decree against the petitioner/tenant under Section 14(1)(j) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the ground that the petitioner/tenant failed to repair the damage caused to the tenanted premises within the period of 30 days granted as per Section 14(10) of the Act, by the judgment dated 01.8.2011.2. The judgment dated 01.8...
M/S Maja Health Care Division Vs. M/S Trance International & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 99/2013 % Judgment reserved on 16.7.2014 Judgment pronounced on November 14, 2014 M/S MAJA HEALTH CARE DIVISION ..... Plaintiff Through : Mr.Neeraj Grover and Ms.Meghna Chandra, Advs. versus M/S TRANCE INTERNATIONAL & ANR ..... Defendants Through : Mr.H.P. Singh and Mr.Navroop Singh Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J I.A.907/2013 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of registered trade mark, passing off, delivery up and rendition of accounts of profits.2. Summons in the suit and notice in I.A.907/2013 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC were directed to be issued on 21.1.2013. While issuing summons in the suit on 21.1.2013, the Court passed a partial ex parte ad interim injunction order restraining the defendants from selling perfumes, deodorants, cosmetics, etc. under the mark Velvet COBRA. It may be noticed that on 21.1.2013 counsel for the plaintiff ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi ( Central) -iii Vs. Hari Chand Shri G ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2014
$~1, 2 & 3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:14. h November, 2014. + ITA Nos. 536/2014, 537/2014 & 588/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI ( CENTRAL) -III ..... Appellant Through Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Abhishek Baghel, Advocate. versus HARI CHAND SHRI GOPAL Through ..... Respondent CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) We have heard learned counsel for the Revenue at some length, but do not find any ground or reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 3rd January, 2014 in view of the facts of the present case.2. The respondent herein is an individual and the assessment years involved are 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. Search and seizure action under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) was carried out on the Gopal Zarda group including M/s. Gopal Corporation Ltd.3. The respondent-assessee was not subjected to search and seizure operations but subse...
Dow International Technology Corporation & Ors Vs. Elixir Trading Pvt ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order delivered on:14. h November, 2014 % + I.A. No.16142/2013 in CS(OS) No.612/2013 DOW INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Sr.Adv. with Ms.Shiraz Patodia & Ms.Shikha Tandon, Advs. versus ELIXIR TRADING PVT LTD ..... Defendant Through Mr.Gaurav Mitra, Adv. with Mr.Rishabh Maheshwari & Ms.Samreen, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademarks and passing off etc. was filed by the plaintiffs on the basis that the plaintiffs are the owners of the trademark DOW and several variants thereof. The interim order was passed against the defendants restraining them from using the trademarks DOW, DOW FLOW and FilmTec. The said interim order was also confirmed by order dated 29th October, 2013. The defendant made the request before the Court to dispose of the material seized by the Local Commissioner under a...
Rishi & Ors. Vs. State of N.C.T. of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. No.667 of 2008 RISHI & ORS. .....Appellants Through: Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amit Khanna and Mr. Sanat Tokas, Advocates. versus STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP. SI Subhash, PS: Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. AND CRL.A. No.704 of 2008 ABHAY RAM ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Jayant K. Sud and Mr. Ajay P. Tushir, Advocates. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP. SI Subhash, PS: Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amit Khanna and Mr. Sanat Tokas, Advocates for Respondents. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER1411.2014 1. There are two appeals before this Court. Criminal Appeal No.667 of 2008 is by 14 Appellants and is directed against the judgment dated 30th May 2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) convicting them for the offences under Sections 149/325 read with Section 149 and Section 323 read wi...
- ‹ Prev
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- Next ›
- Last »