Delhi Court December 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 86 of about 1,089 results (0.021 seconds)Glaxo Group Limited and anr. Vs. Indkus Drugs and Pharma Pvt. Ltd and ...
Court: Delhi
* 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!Mahavir Prasad and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: December 04, 2014 + LA.APP. 568/2011 & C.M.No.12408/2014 MAHAVIR PRASAD & ORS. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N. S. Negi, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Advocate for respondent No.1-UOI Mr. Kunal Sharma, Mr. Abhishek Rai Singh & Ms. Sriti Bisoi, Advocate for respondent No.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Impugned judgment grants compensation @`15 lacs per acre with consequential benefits for Block A land situated in village Bharthal, Delhi to appellants, in pursuance to Notification of 13th December, 2000 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. At the hearing of this appeal, learned counsel for appellant has placed reliance upon Apex Courts decision of 13th February, 2014 in Civil Appeal No.2091/2014, titled as Impulse India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & ors. wherein the compensation for Block A acquired lands to similarly situated claimant...
Tag this Judgment!Nasir Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
$~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!Pinky Sharma Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:30. 10.2014 Judgment delivered on:04. 12.2014 % W.P.(Crl.) 2026/2014 and Crl. M.A. No.15639/2014 PINKY SHARMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Pradeep Jain, Mr A. Samad, Mr. Shubhankar Jha & Mr. Ashish Batra, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG along with Mr. Sanjeev Narula, CGSC and Mr. Ajay Sondhi & Ms. Shreya Sinha, Advocates for respondent No.1/ UOI. Mr. S.K. Dubey & Mr. Rajmangal Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2/ DRI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seek a writ of Certiorari- to quash the detention order bearing No.F. No.673/07/2014-CUS VIII dated 25.07.2014 (hereinafter referred to as the detention order) passed under Section 3(1) (i) & 3 (1) (iii) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smu...
Tag this Judgment!Usman Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: December 04, 2014 + CRL.A. 1350/2014 USMAN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Pramod Kumar Dubey, Advocate with Ms.Megha, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State with Insp.Girish Kumar Singh, P.S.Okhla Industrial Area. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) Crl.M.B.No.10623/2014 Since the appeal is being heard, instant application which seeks suspension of the sentence pending hearing of the appeal is dismissed. CRL.A. 1350/2014 1. With respect to the testimony of Fahimuddin PW-1, Jamaluddin PW- 2, the brothers of deceased Taufiq Alam @ Sonu and Mohan Singh PW-3, the owner of house RZ-336/21, Tuglakabad Extn. Delhi, in a room whereof dead body of Taufiq Alam was recovered in the morning of January 21, 2008, the learned Trial Judge has held that the prosecution has successfully established that appellant Usm...
Tag this Judgment!Kawaljit Kaur Walia Vs. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8529/2014 Decided on :04. 12.2014 IN THE MATTER OF: KAWALJIT KAUR WALIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate versus GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Nidhi Raman, Advocate for R-1 to R-3/DOE. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner, who claims to have been regularly employed by the respondent No.4 and 5/School to the post of TGT, praying inter alia for directions to the School to pay her the arrears recommended under the Fifth and Sixth Pay Commissions and gratuity dues alongwith interest.2. A perusal of the paper book reveals that before approaching this Court, the petitioner did not take any steps to agitate her grievance against the respondents No.4 and 5/School before the respondents No.1 and 3/DOE. Further, the petitioner has not placed on record any document to establish that she was a regularly appointed teacher ...
Tag this Judgment!Vibhuti Sharma Vs. Management of Green Field Public School and ors
Court: Delhi
* 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!Manish Gadodia Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:30. 10.2014 Judgment delivered on:04. 12.2014 % W.P.(Crl.) 1695/2014 MANISH GADODIA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Vikram Chaudhri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjay Agarwal, Mr. Shorab Kirpal, Mr. Raktim Gogoi, & Mr. Wattan Sharma, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG along with Mr. Sanjeev Narula, CGSC and Mr. Ajay Kalia, Advocates for respondent No.1/ UOI. Mr. S.K. Dubey & Mr. Rajmangal Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2/ DRI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seek a writ of Certiorari to quash the detention order bearing No.F. No.673/06/2014-CUS VIII dated 25.07.2014 (hereinafter referred to as the detention order) passed under Section 3(1) (i) & 3(1) (iii) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Preven...
Tag this Judgment!Akeel Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~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!Urmil and Others Vs. Savitri Devi
Court: Delhi
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on 3rd December, 2014 + CS(OS) 3054/2012 URMIL AND OTHERS Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr. Rajat Aneja, Advocate & Ms. Rashmi Verma, Advocate versus SAVITRI DEVI Through ..... Defendant Mr. Ashok Gurnani, Advocate % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL G.P. Mittal, J.(Oral) CS(OS) 3054/2012 & I.A.18517/2012(O.XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC) 1. This suit for partition has been filed by the Plaintiffs against the Defendant with the averments that Late Shri Tek Chand was the owner of property bearing no.C-2, Shivaji Park, West Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi measuring 438 sq. yds. The property was purchased by the earlier said Late Shri Tek Chand from its previous owner for valuable consideration on the basis of two sale deeds dated 19.07.1962 and 20.07.1962 duly registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar. It is averred that said Late Shri Tek Chand during his life time executed a Will dated 02.04.1986 and on the basis of the said Will, the three P...
Tag this Judgment!