Delhi Court December 2014 Judgments
Arun Kumar Pandey @ Anil Kumar and Anr Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and Or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2014
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5280/2014 ARUN KUMAR PANDEY @ ANIL KUMAR & ANR Through ..... Petitioners Mr. Ketan Madan, Adv. with petitioners. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr. O. P. Saxena, Additional Public Prosecutor. ASI Ram Kishan P.S. I.P.Estate. Smt. Shanti, Widow of deceased, in person. Sh. Kishan Prakash, son of deceased, in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) Crl.M.A. No.18013/2014 Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application is disposed off. Crl.M.C. No.5280/2014 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No.100/2010 registered under Sections 279, 337 IPC at police station I.P. Estate, on 22.07.2010, on the ground that the matter has been settled between the accused / petitioners and the legal representatives of the deceased Khanchand.2. Issue notice.3. Mr. O. P. Saxena, Additional Public Prosecutor fo...
Tag this Judgment!Ashutosh Verma Vs. Cbi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:18. h September, 2014 Date of Decision:4thDecemher, 2014 % + CRL. M.C. 79/2014 ASHUTOSH VERMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Ms. Smriti Sinha, Mr. Shri Singh, Ms. Swati Goswami, Ms. Vasundhara Nagrath, Mr. Pulkit Mishra, Ms. Namita Wali and Mr. Abhinav, Advocates. versus CBI Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Narender Mann, Spl. PP for CBI with Mr. Manoj Pant, Ms. Utkarsha Kohli, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH1 By way of the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, the petitioner has assailed impugned order dated 01.11.2013 passed by learned Special Judge (PC Act), CBI-02, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in CC No.06/2013 arising out of RC No.AC-1-2008-A0001-ACU-1, New Delhi whereby application under Section 207 Cr.P.C. filed by th...
Tag this Judgment!Dhiren Gulati Vs. State and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2014
$~9 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 5157/2014 DHIREN GULATI ..... Petitioner Through Ms.Manju Mehta & Mr.Kunal Mehta, Advocates with petitioner in person. versus STATE & ANR Through ..... Respondents Mr.O.P.Saxena, APP with SI Birender Singh PS Chitranjan Park. Complainant in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA ORDER0412.2014 % Crl.M.A.No.17687/2014 (exemption) Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application is disposed off. Crl.M.C. No.5157/2014 1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.284/2013 registered under Sections 498-A/406 IPC at Police Station Chitranjan Park on 19th October, 2013 on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.2. Issue notice. Mr. O.P. Saxena, Additional Public Prosecutor enters appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the State.3. Respondent no.2 and complainant are present in person. They are identified b...
Tag this Judgment!Deepak Gautam Vs. Jai Prakash and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2014
$~A-9 & 10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:04. 12.2014 MAC.APP. 280/2011 DEEPAK GAUTAM Through ..... Appellant Mr.Navneet Goyal, Advocate. versus JAI PRAKASH & ORS Through + ..... Respondents Ms.Jagrati Singh, Advocate for R-1 and 3. Ms.Shubhanda Khosla, Advocate for R2. MAC.APP. 330/2012 JAI PRAKASH & ANR Through ..... Appellants Ms.Jagrati Singh, Advocate. versus NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD & ORS ..... Respondents Through Ms.Shubhanda Khosla, Advocate for R1. Mr.Navneet Goyal, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) 1. These two appeals impugn the award dated 20.11.2010. MAC APP. No.330/2012 is filed by the owner of the offending vehicle whearas MAC. APP. 280/2011 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation. Page 1 of 8 MAC. APP.280/2011 & 330/2012 2. The brief facts which led to filing of the claim petition are that on 15.09.2006 the appellant Sh. Deepak Gautam was going on his motorcycle and when h...
Tag this Judgment!Rajbir Singh and Ors. Vs. Vijay Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2014
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on :4. h December, 2014 + CS(OS) 2265/2012 RAJBIR SINGH & ORS. Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr. Prem Kishore Tripathi, Advocate & Mr. K.K. Sinha, Advocate versus VIJAY SINGH Through ..... Defendant Ms. Gita Dhingra, Advocate % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL G.P. Mittal, J.(Oral) CS(OS) 2265/2012 & I.A.13627/2012(O.XXXIX Rules 1&2 CPC) 1. By virtue of this application under Order XXXIX Rules 1and 2 CPC, the Plaintiffs seek an ad interim injunction restraining Defendant Vijay Singh from selling, alienating or parting with possession of the suit property i.e. 1/3rd undivided share of deceased Bishan Singh in the joint holding i.e. agricultural land and residential houses upon gher and plots situated within the revenue estate of Village Goela Khurd and Kutabapur, New Delhi till the decision of the suit.2. This suit for declaration and permanent injunction has been filed by the Plaintiffs who are the sons and grand-son of Kushi R...
Tag this Judgment!Vibhuti Sharma Vs. Management of Green Field Public School and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2014
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Cont. Cas. (C) No.845/2014 Decided on :04. h December, 2014 VIBHUTI SHARMA Through: Petitioner Mrs. Rachana Joshi Issar & Ms. Ambreen Rasool, Advocates. Versus MANAGEMENT OF GREEN FIELD PUBLIC SCHOOL & ORS Respondents Through: Ms. Mamta Tandon for Mr. V.K. Tandon, Advocate for DOE. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present contempt petition is premised on the wilful disobedience of the order dated 13.8.2009.2. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that by virtue of the aforesaid order, the petitioner was to be given the benefit of Sixth Pay Commission recommendations as well as the benefit of senior scale in terms of the undertaking filed by Dr. (Mrs.) M. Barsaley, Principal-cum-Manager, Green Field Public School, who is the respondent herein.3. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and have also gone through the order including the undertaking given by the Principal-cum-...
Tag this Judgment!Glaxo Group Limited and Anr. Vs. Indkus Drugs and Pharma Pvt. Ltd and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :14. h NOVEMBER, 2014 DECIDED ON :4. h DECEMBER, 2014 + CS (OS) 1841/2010 GLAXO GROUP LIMITED AND ANR. Through : ..... Plaintiffs Mr.Manav Kumar, Advocate. VERSUS INDKUS DRUGS & PHARMA PVT. LTD & ORS...... Defendants Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The plaintiffs have instituted the present suit for permanent injunction inter alia seeking to restrain the defendants from infringing its registered trademark BETNOVATE and infringement of copyright in the packaging pertaining thereto, passing off, delivery up and damages. The plaintiff No.1, viz. Glaxo Group Limited, is a company incorporated under the laws of United Kingdom. Plaintiff No.2 is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. Plaintiff No.1 manufactures and markets various pharmaceuticals and medicinal preparations and healthcare products in India through its affiliate being plaintiff No.2.2. The plaintiffs submit that the present...
Tag this Judgment!Akeel Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2014
$~9,10,13, 14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : December 04, 2014 + CRL.A. 1094/2014 NASIR Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Vivek Sharma, Advocate with Mr.Ashok Verma, Advocate versus THE STATE Represented by: + ..... Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State with Insp.Vijay Kumar, P.S.Vivek Vihar CRL.A. 1121/2014 RAJ KUMAR @ JHUMRU Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Rajat Agnihotri, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Represented by: + ..... Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State with Insp.Vijay Kumar, P.S.Vivek Vihar CRL.A. 1374/2014 KALE Represented by: CRL.A. Nos. 1094, 1121, 1374 & 1459 of /2014 ..... Appellant Mr.Vivek Sharma, Advocate with Mr.Ashok Verma, versus THE STATE Represented by: + ..... Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State with Insp.Vijay Kumar, P.S.Vivek Vihar CRL.A. 1459/2014 AKEEL Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Azhar Qayum, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohar Pal and Ors Vs. State and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2014
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3210/2014 MOHAR PAL & ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. S.K. Dugal, Advocate with petitioners in person. versus STATE & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. P.K. Mishra, APP for the State with SI Megh Raj, PS Badar Pur. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % 1. ORDER0412.2014 This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.43/2003 registered under Sections 341/323/326/34 IPC at Police Station Badarpur on 26th January, 2003 on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.2. Issue notice. Mr. P.K. Mishra, Additional Public Prosecutor enters appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the State/respondent No.1.3. Complainant-Amit Kumar and injured-Vinod Kumar along with petitioners are present in person. They are also identified by the Investigating Officer/ Sub-Inspector Megh Raj, Police Station Badar Pur.4. It is stated that ...
Tag this Judgment!Sudarshan Kumar JaIn Vs. Mukta JaIn and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CM(M) Nos. 208/2013 & 211/2013 4th December , 2014 % + C.M(M) No.208/2013 SUDARSHAN KUMAR JAIN Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Rahul Kumar Srivastava, Advocate. VERSUS MUKTA JAIN & ANR. Through: + ...... Respondents Mr. Rajeev Pandey, Adv. for R-1. C.M(M) No.211/2013 SMT. BIMLA JAIN & ANR. Through: ......Petitioners Mr. Rahul Kumar Srivastava, Advocate. VERSUS MUKTA JAIN & ANR. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. Rajeev Pandey, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. These petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are filed by the applicants under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugning the order of the trial court dated 7.1.2013 by which the trial court has dismissed the applications under Order I Rule 10 CPC.2. The applications under Order I Rule 10 CPC were filed in a suit for possession, recovery of rent etc against a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- Next ›
- Last »