Delhi Court March 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.
ireo Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr.Lalit Sanduja and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :16.09.2013 Decided on :14.03.2014 + CCP (O) 124/2012 in CS(OS)3156/2012 IREO PVT. LTD. .... Petitioner Through Mr.Ajay Sahni, Ms.Kanika Bajaj and Ms.Shivangi Amrit, Advocates versus MR.MAHENDER ARORA & ORS. .....Respondents Through Mr.Chetan Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr.Pramod Kumar Singh and Mr.Abhishek Ghai, Advocates + CCP (O) 62/2013 in CS(OS)3156/2012 IREO PVT. LTD. .... Petitioner Through Mr.Ajay Sahni, Ms.Kanika Bajaj and Ms.Shivangi Amrit, Advocates versus MR.LALIT SANDUJA & ORS. .....Respondents Through Mr.Chetan Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr.Pramod Kumar Singh and Mr.Abhishek Ghai, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. The plaintiff has filed the Suit CS(OS)3156/2012 seeking a decree of permanent injunction to restrain the defendant from offering for sale or dealing in real estate business under the impugned trade mark Genesis SKYON or any other trade mark which may be deceptively similar...
Court on Its Own Motion Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
$~4 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(CRL) 1549/2009 COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajeev K. Virmani, Senior Advocate (Amicus Curiae) versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. L.K. Singh, Advocate for Delhi Prosecutor Welfare Association. Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Ms. Aditi Gupta, Advocates for UPSC Mr. P.K. Sharma, Standing Counsel for CBI, Delhi High Court with Mr.Jaideep Tandon and Mr.Rakesh Sharma, Advocates Ms. Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel for GNCT of Delhi and for Home Department and Law & Justice. Mr. Ashok Aggarwal and Mr.Umesh Singh, Advocates for Intervenor Ms. Meera Bhatia, Advocate for UOI. Mr. Saleem Ahmed, Officiating Standing Counsel for GNCT of Delhi CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA ORDER % 14.03.2014 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(Oral) 1. Mr. Rajeev K. Virmani, Senior Advocate and Amicus Curiae for the petitioner has placed on record the suggestions given by him to improve and strengthen the functioni...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Amit Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:14th March, 2014 % + MAC.APP. No.938/2012 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.L.K.Tyagi, Advocate. Versus AMIT KUMAR & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Manish Maini, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is preferred against the impugned award dated 30.04.2012, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation as under:Pecuniary damages (Special damages): a)Medical expenses-----------------------------------------Rs. 1,094/b)Loss of income for 4 months---------------------------Rs. 15,856/c)Special diet expenses------------------------------------Rs. 7,000/d)Conveyance charges------------------------------------Rs. 5,000/e)Attendant charges---------------------------------------Rs. 2,000/Non-pecuniary damages (General damages) f)Pain, suffering, mental shock and trauma---------Rs. 40,000/_________________...
Pradeep Saini Vs. Sheela Arora
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
$~2 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO812014 and CMs 4845/2014 (stay) & 4846/2014 (Exemption) 14th March, 2014 % PRADEEP SAINI Through: ......Appellant Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohit Goel, Mr. Aman Bhalla, Advocates VERSUS SHEELA ARORA Through: ...... Respondent Ms. Priya Kumar, Mr. Prashan Singh, Advocates CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM48462014 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. Application stands disposed off. FAO812014 and CMs 4845/2014 (stay) 1. This first appeal is filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) impugning the judgment of the court below dated 25.3.2013 which had dismissed the FAO812014 1 objections filed by the appellant/objector under Section 34 of the Act. The Award of the arbitrator dated 1.12.2011 decreed the petition filed by the respondent/claimant/landlord for possession a...
Sh. Dharam Pal and anr. Vs. Sh. Baldev Dass
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.180/2011 14th March, 2014 % SH. DHARAM PAL AND ANR. Through: ......Appellants Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Advocate with Mr. Harpreet Singh, Advocate. VERSUS SH. BALDEV DASS Through: ...... Respondent Mr. D.L. Dhingra, Advocate. Mr. Imran, Advocate with Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate for applicant. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. No.4896/2014(under Section 151 CPC by applicants) 1. Application is dismissed as not pressed as the applicants if they have any rights in the suit property will initiate and take proper orders in the said proceedings. This is so observed because the judgment passed in a civil proceeding is only binding inter parties as per Section 11 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and will not bind third parties unless they claim through the parties to the suit. Application is dismissed as not pressed with the aforesaid observations and liberty. + RSA...
Master Aman Vs. Meharban and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:14th March, 2014 % + MAC.APP. No.475/2012 MASTER AMAN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Rishi Sood, Advocate. Versus MEHARBAN & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.J.P.N.Shahi, Advocate for Respondent No.3/Insurance Company. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is preferred against the impugned award dated 08.07.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation as under:1. Disability of 22% : Rs.44,000/2. Pain and Sufferings : Rs.15,000/3. Special Diet : Rs. 5,000/4. Conveyance : Rs. 5,000/5. For Medicines : Rs. 3,500/_________________________________________________ Total =Rs.72,500/_________________________________________________ (Rupees Seventy-Two Thousand and Five Hundred only) _________________________________________________ Interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount was also awarde...
Suresh Chand Purwar (Karta) Vs. Vivek Purwar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO1982013 and CM APPL. 6777/2013 (Stay) 14th March, 2014 % SURESH CHAND PURWAR (KARTA) ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.K. Bansal and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advs. versus VIVEK PURWAR & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Chandra Shekhar Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This first appeal is filed under Order 43 Rule 1 (a) CPC against the judgement of the trial court dated 01.02.2013 by which the suit plaint filed by the appellant/plaintiff has been returned under Order 7 Rule 10 CPC for being presented in the Court of correct territorial jurisdiction. I note that the suit plaint has been returned not at the stage of final arguments, but at the initial stage of pleadings and where no evidence is led on behalf of the parties.2. The subject suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff was a suit claiming rights in the trademark HARI and HARISONS used for seeking con...
Grant Thornton India Llp Vs. Resolution Capital Global Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision :14th March , 2014 % + CO. APPL. No.852/2013 in CO.PET. No.594/2012 GRANT THORNTON INDIA LLP ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ambar Qamaruddin with Mr. Ajay Talesara, Advocates. versus RESOLUTION CAPITAL GLOBAL PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajendra Sahu and Mr. Rishabh Sahu, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR R. V. EASWAR, J.: (ORAL) 1. By order dated 22.3.2013 this Court admitted the winding up petition filed by the petitioner and also appointed a provisional liquidator and ordered publication of citation in the newspapers.2. The company application No.852/2013 was filed by the respondent-company seeking recall of the appointment of the provisional liquidator. On 21.5.2013 this Court issued notice and in the interim kept the order appointing provisional liquidator in abeyance.3. I shall now proceed to dispose of the company application 852/2013. I notice that th...
Babu Lal Jajoo, Rajasthan Vs. the Chief Secretary, Government of Rajas ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
Dalip Singh, Judicial Member: 1. This Application has been filed by the Applicant with the prayer for a direction to the Respondentsto take effective steps with regard to complete ban and prevention of the use of plastic carry bags. 2. This Tribunal while dealing with the aforesaid issue in O.A. No. 04/2013 titled as Sandeep Lahariya Vs. State of M.P. and Ors. also decided and issued directions to the three States of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhatisgarh with regard to the plastic carry bags and the observance of the Plastics Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 as also the implementation of the concept of EPR which has been introduced in the aforesaid Rules. Vide the above judgment the State of Rajasthan is directed to submit the compliance report by 31st May, 2014. 3. As The aforesaid judgment has already been delivered on 11th November, 2013, we do not propose to issue any fresh direction in this matter. 4. This application, accordingly, stands disposed of....
Cce, Allahabad Vs. M/S. Hi-tech Medical Products Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
D.N. Panda, J. 1. Cannulae and Needles were imported duty free by the appellant availing exemption granted under Notification No. 53/97-CUS dated 03.06.97 for use in the manufacture of Disposable syringes with or without needles. On enquiry, it was noticed that the appellant had imported 20,72,50,000 pcs of Cannulae and 20,49,03,815 pcs of Needles during the period November, 96 to April, 2003 and issued 12,16,50,000 pcs of Cannulae and 20,49,03,815 pcs of Needles for the manufacture of finished goods. Out of such issue, 65,52,285 pcs of cannulae and 3,26,64,788 pcs of needles were claimed to be waste and scrap. 2. Repeated requests were made to appellant to provide year-wise details of Needles and Cannulae imported duty free and waste and scrap generated in manufacturing of finished products for the period 1996-97 to April, 2003. But appellant provided details in respect of Cannulae only for the period 1997-98 to 2001-02 and no details were provided in respect of needles. Summons dated...
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- Next ›
- Last »