Delhi Court July 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 35 of about 371 results (0.025 seconds)Asif and Naim Vs. Allahwala and anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:02. 07.2014 + RC. REV. 283/2010 & CM No.8007/2011 (stay) ALLAHRAKHA & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. V.B. Andley, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajiv Duggal and Mr. Aly Mirza, Advocates. Versus ALLAHWALA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vinod Malhotra & Mr. Nikhil Malhotra, Advocates. + RC. REV. 297/2010 & CM No.8009/2011 (stay) ASIF & NAIM ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. V.B. Andley, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajiv Duggal and Mr. Aly Mirza, Advocates. Versus ALLAHWALA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vinod Malhotra & Mr. Nikhil Malhotra, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI % MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI1 This petition impugns an order of 07.09.2010 which allowed the respondents application under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short the Act) and ordered the eviction of the petitioner from premises No.4234, Gali Qutubuddin, Gali Shahtara, Ajmeri Gate, Delhi.2. It has been the case of ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Samrat Industries Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :02. 07.2014 + W.P.(C) 1617/1997 M/S. SAMRAT INDUSTRIES ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. G.L. Rawal, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Rajesh Rawal and Sh. Jagjit Singh, Advocates. versus UOI AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Ritika Jhurani, for Sh. Sachin Datta, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The controversy in this case centres around interpretation of para 197(2) of the Import-Export Policy 1985-88 (hereafter the IE Policy).2. The petitioner feels aggrieved by an order dated 21.03.1997 made by the Appellate Committee constituted under the said IE Policy. The Committee affirmed the order of the adjudicating authority which had determined the penalty payable by the writ petitioner to be `19 lakhs. W.P.(C)1617/1997 Page 1 3. The petitioner was issued 45 REP licenses which inter alia on their face mentioned seeds as articles capable of impo...
Tag this Judgment!Maya John and anr Vs. University of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA5722013 & CM No.12094/2013 Date of decision:2. d July, 2014 % MAYA JOHN AND ANR Through : ..... Appellants Mr. Sunil Mathews and Mr. Aditya Shukla, Advs. versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Adv. for R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA GITA MITTAL, J.(Oral) 1. The appellants assail the order dated 3rd July, 2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C)No.8419/2011 rejecting the prayer made by the petitioners.2. In the year 2006, the Delhi University (respondent no.1 herein) came out with a scheme called the University Teaching Assistant Scheme 2006 (UTA Scheme hereafter). Under this scheme, candidates who had meritoriously completed their master degree course in the year under consideration or in the year prior thereto; had secured more than 55% at the under graduate and post graduate levels; were amongst the top 30 persons of the successful LPA No....
Tag this Judgment!Silor Associates Sa Vs. Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:28. 05.2014 Judgment delivered on:01. 07.2014 O.M.P. 1037/2013 SILOR ASSOCIATES SA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. A.K. Sengupta, Mr. Suraj Prakash, Piyush Choudhary and Deblina Sengupta, Advocates versus BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICAL LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Prashant Mehta, Ms. Priya Pathania and Harleen Singh, Advocates CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. This petition has been preferred under Section 27 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) to seek necessary orders and directions to direct the respondent to produce the two documents, the details whereof are as follows: i) Communication dated 22.06.2005 allegedly sent by the respondent to the petitioner containing summary of delays with the civil contractor along with its proof of delivery; and ii) Reply of the respondent submitted to its Vigilance Department to the queries issued by the...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Hari Ram and ors. Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:1. t July, 2014 % + CS(OS) 1441/2004 & I.A.7527/2013 (of defendant u/O7R-11 CPC) SAMANIT ENTERPRISES & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Pawan Mathur, Advocate. AND + CS(OS) 1442/2004 & I.A.7528/2013 (of defendant u/O7R-11 CPC) ULTIMATE SERVICES PVT. LTD. & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Pawan Mathur, Advocate. AND + CS(OS) 818/2006 & I.A.7526/2013 (of defendant u/O7R-11 CPC) SH. HARI RAM AND ORS. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. D.V. Khatri, Adv. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Pawan Mathur, Advocate. AND + CS(OS) 1128/2008 & I.A. No.21037/2011 (for correction in the crossexamination of PW-1) JASBIR SINGH Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Rajat Aneja, Ms. Rashi Verma and Ms. Swati Gupta, Advocates. Versus DDA AND ORS T...
Tag this Judgment!Surjit Singh Bhatia and Others Vs. Tej Raj Singh Goel (Huf)
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NE W DELHI Judgment Reserved on:25. th February, 2014 Judgment Pronounced on:01. st July, 2014 CS(OS) 1447/2010 SURJIT SINGH B HATIA & OTHERS ..... PLAINTIFFS Through: Mr. Ravi Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhijat, Mr. Ajay Mohan Gulati and Mr.Harsh Hari Haran, Advocates versus T EJ RAJ SINGH GOEL (HUF) Through: ..... DEFENDANT Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ashish Aggarwal and Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocates CORA M: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.1. The Plaintiffs have filed the present suit seeking specific performance of Agreement to Sell dated 27.06.2008 in respect of property bearing No.D -104, Defence Colony, New Delhi, admeasuring 333 sq. yards.2. The property was purchased by the Defendant by Sale Deed dated 18.02.1984, and was converted from leasehold to free-hold vide Deed of Conveyance dated 02.12.2005.3. As per the Plaintiffs during the months of May-June, 2008, the Plaintiffs were approached by one Mr. Vir...
Tag this Judgment!Stiefel Laboratories, Inc and anr Vs. Ajanta Pharma Ltd.
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order Reserved on:03. rd March, 2014 Order Pronounced on:01. st July, 2014 CS(OS) No.2373/2013 STIEFEL L ABORATORIES , INC & ANR Through: ..... PLAINTIFFS Mr. Sanjeev Sindhwani, Senior Advocate With Mr. Manav Kumar, Advocate versus AJANTA PHARM A L TD . Through: .....DEFENDANT Mr. Hemant Singh with Mr. Shashi Ojha and Mr. Pranav Narain, Advocates CORA M: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.IA Nos. 19390/2013 (under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC) and IA No.21074/2013 (under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC1 Plaintiffs have filed the present suit for permanent injunction for restraining the Defendant from infringing the trademark of the Plaintiff CLINDOXYL and from manufacturing, advertising and marketing its products under the deceptively similar marks CLINOXID / CLINOXIDE / CLINOXIDE-A, passing off and damages.2. Plaintiffs claim to be the members of GlaxoSmithKline group of companies. engaged in Plaintiff No.1 is stated to be research, develo...
Tag this Judgment!Jasbir Singh Vs. Dda and ors
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:1. t July, 2014 % + CS(OS) 1441/2004 & I.A.7527/2013 (of defendant u/O7R-11 CPC) SAMANIT ENTERPRISES & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Pawan Mathur, Advocate. AND + CS(OS) 1442/2004 & I.A.7528/2013 (of defendant u/O7R-11 CPC) ULTIMATE SERVICES PVT. LTD. & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Pawan Mathur, Advocate. AND + CS(OS) 818/2006 & I.A.7526/2013 (of defendant u/O7R-11 CPC) SH. HARI RAM AND ORS. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. D.V. Khatri, Adv. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Pawan Mathur, Advocate. AND + CS(OS) 1128/2008 & I.A. No.21037/2011 (for correction in the crossexamination of PW-1) JASBIR SINGH Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Rajat Aneja, Ms. Rashi Verma and Ms. Swati Gupta, Advocates. Versus DDA AND ORS T...
Tag this Judgment!Radnik Exports Vs. Standard Chartered Bank
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:1. t July, 2014 % + CS(OS) 2296/2009, IAs No.15685/2009 (u/O39R-1&2 CPC), 12375/2010 (u/O XI R-2 CPC) & 16711/2013 (u/O VI R-17 CPC) (all of the plaintiff) RADNIK EXPORTS Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. S.L. Gupta with Mr. Amitabh Krishan, Advs. versus STANDARD CHARTERED BANK ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Sumit Bansal, Mr. Ateev Mathur, Ms. Richa Oberoi & Ms. Jagriti Ahuja, Advs. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The plaintiff, a partnership firm has instituted this suit for declaration that the Structured Currency Option Agreements dated 14th January, 2008 and 1st February, 2008 entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant Bank are agreements by way of wagers hit by the bar of Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and are consequently void and unenforceable and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant Bank from in any manner acting upon or seeking to enforce any transaction under the said agreeme...
Tag this Judgment!Jiwan Kumar Goel Vs. M/S. Civitech Developers Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.165/2014 1st July , 2014 % JIWAN KUMAR GOEL Through: ......Appellant Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate. VERSUS M/S. CIVITECH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. Through: ...... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. No.10205/2014 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. + FAO No.165/2014 2. Supreme Court twenty two years back in the judgment in the case of M/s. Patel Roadways Limited, Bombay Vs. M/s. Prasad Trading Company AIR1992SC1514clarified with respect to Section 20 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) read with its Explanation that when a suit is filed against a company, the suit cannot be filed at the place where the registered office of the company is situated unless the cause of action accrues at the registered office.3. In the present case, the appellant/plaintiff/employee was employed at Noida in U.P. The appellan...
Tag this Judgment!