Delhi Court February 2015 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2015 Page 2 of about 616 results (0.020 seconds)L/Naik Pawan Kumar Vs. Uoi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: February 24, 2015 Judgment Delivered on: February 27, 2015 % + W.P.(C) 6155/2010 L/NAIK NAVEEN KUMAR Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.D.S.Kauntae, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Rishi Kapoor, Advocate for Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC W.P.(C) 1091/2014 L/NAIK PAWAN KUMAR Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.D.S.Kauntae, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Barkha Babbar, Advocate W.P.(C) 1591/2013 NAIK SUBHASH SINGH Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.D.S.Kauntae, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Barkha Babbar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARDEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PARDEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The petitioners in the three captioned petitions hold the rank of either a Lance Naik or a Naik and are aggrieved by the fact that they have been reverted from the Parachute Battalion of the Indian Army to, what the re...
Tag this Judgment!N.M. Jain Vs. K.P. Hegde and Ors.
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:13. h February, 2015 Judgment Pronounced on:27. h February, 2015 W.P.(C) 1861/2001 N.M. JAIN Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Ashok Bhalla, Advocate. versus K.P. HEGDE AND ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Jagat Arora and Mr. Rajat Arora, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.1. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 12.10.1999 dismissing the petitioner from the services and order dated 22.03.2000 upholding the same by the appellate authority with consequential benefits.2. The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioner joined respondent Vijaya Bank as an Officer on 07.04.1972. During his posting at Ansari Road, Daryaganj, Delhi, his branch was adjudged best branch of the zone and was among 20 best branches of the bank in the country. The branch registered a new record of...
Tag this Judgment!Johnson and Johnson Vs. Lupin Limited and Anr
Court: Delhi
.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:27. h February, 2015 % + I.A. No.11918/2012 in CS(OS) 1931/2012 JOHNSON & JOHNSON Through ..... Plaintiff Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Sr. Adv. With Mr. Deepak Gogia & Ms. Priya Rao, Advs. versus LUPIN LIMITED AND ANR ..... Defendants Through Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. With Ms. Alka Parelkar, Mr. Varun Singh, Mr. Anuj Sharma & Mr. Anshumaan Sahni, Advs. for D-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining passing off and rendition of accounts and/or damages, against the defendants in respect of the mark LUCYNTA.2. By this order, I propose to decide the pending application being I.A. No.11918/2012 filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC read with Section 151 CPC.3. Brief facts of the case as per plaint are : i) That the plaintiff, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of State of New Jersey, USA, was founded i...
Tag this Judgment!Manoj Kumar Vs. The State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:09. h February, 2015 Judgment Pronounced on:27. h February, 2015 CRL.REV.P. 153/2006 MANOJ KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Pramod Saxena, APP for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.1. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 06.09.2005 and order on sentence dated 08.09.2005 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, awarding the sentence to the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and fine of Rs.500/- under Section 279 IPC, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six days; sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and fine of Rs.500/- under Section 337 IPC, in default to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six days; sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and fi...
Tag this Judgment!Naik Subhash Singh Vs. Uoi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: February 24, 2015 Judgment Delivered on: February 27, 2015 % + W.P.(C) 6155/2010 L/NAIK NAVEEN KUMAR Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.D.S.Kauntae, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Rishi Kapoor, Advocate for Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC W.P.(C) 1091/2014 L/NAIK PAWAN KUMAR Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.D.S.Kauntae, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Barkha Babbar, Advocate W.P.(C) 1591/2013 NAIK SUBHASH SINGH Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.D.S.Kauntae, Advocate versus UOI AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Barkha Babbar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARDEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PARDEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The petitioners in the three captioned petitions hold the rank of either a Lance Naik or a Naik and are aggrieved by the fact that they have been reverted from the Parachute Battalion of the Indian Army to, what the re...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Sajan Arora and Ors. Vs. State of Nct of Delhi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
$~91 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 27, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 763/2015 & Crl. M.As. 2876-77/2015 SHYAM SAJAN ARORA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. P.N. Malhotra, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT DELHI & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vinod Diwakar, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with SI Vijay Kumar Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.117/2008, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC registered at police station Subzi Mandi, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 26th September, 2013 arrived at Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. Notice. Mr. Vinod Diwakar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question by SI Vijay Kumar on the basis of identity proof CRL.M.C. 763/2015 Page 1 produced b...
Tag this Judgment!Pramod Chand Mathur and Ors. Vs. State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi) and Anr ...
Court: Delhi
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 27, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 362/2015 & Crl.M.A.1425/2015 PRAMOD CHAND MATHUR & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Shiv Kumar Sharma, Advocate versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Anwar Khan Mr.Kishore Kumar, Advocate with respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.96/2009, under Sections 498-A/406 of IPC registered at police station Prahant Vihar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Settlement whose terms find mention in the joint statement of petitionerhusband and respondent No.2-wife made before Family Court on 29th March, 2014. Notice. Ms. Nishi Jain, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and Mr. Kishore Kumar, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2. CRL.M.C. 362/2015 Page 1 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor fo...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Alcatel Lucent Canada
Court: Delhi
$~2 to 32 and 37 to 43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on 27th February, 2015 + ITA1192015 CIT ..... Appellant versus + ALCATEL LUCENT CANADA ..... Respondent ITA1202015 CIT-1 ..... Appellant versus ALCATEL LUCENT ENTERPRISE + ITA1212015 CIT-1 ..... Respondent ..... Appellant versus + ALCATEL LUCENT SHANGHAI BELL ..... Respondent ITA1222015 CIT-1 ..... Appellant versus + ALCATEL LUCENT FRANCE USA INC ..... Respondent ITA1232015 CIT-1 ..... Appellant versus ALCATEL LUCENT FRANCE ITA1192015 & conn. ..... Respondent Page 1 + ITA1242015 CIT-1 ..... Appellant versus + ALCATEL LUCENT SHANGHAI BELL ..... Respondent ITA1252015 CIT-1 ..... Appellant versus + ALCATEL LUCENT FRANCE ..... Respondent ITA1262015 CIT-1 ..... Appellant versus + ALCATEL LUCENT ENTERPRISE ..... Respondent ITA1272015 CIT-1 ..... Appellant versus + ALCATEL LUCENT ENTERPRISE ..... Respondent ITA1282015 CIT ..... Appellant versus + ALCATEL LUCENT CANADA ..... Respondent ITA1292015 CIT-1 ..... Appellant ITA...
Tag this Judgment!Ahesan Abbas @ Monu Vs. State
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on 14th February, 2015 Judgment delivered on 27th February, 2015 + CRL.A. 1347/2014 % AHESAN ABBAS @ MONU Appellant Through: Mr. M. L. Yadav, Advocate. Versus STATE Respondent Through: Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP for the State + CRL.A. 1375/2014 JITENDER @ JEETU @ HADDI Appellant Through: Mr. Kartickay Mathur, Advocate. Versus STATE Respondent Through: Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP for the State + RAVI STATE CRL.A. 1703/2014 Appellant Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Advocate Ms. Shiv Chopra, Advocate and Ms. Megha, Advocate. Versus Respondent Through: Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP for the State CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G. S. SISTANI, J.1. Present appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 02.05.2014 and order on sentence dated 29.05.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, in S.C. No.97/2008. The appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common...
Tag this Judgment!Sushil Sharma and Anr. Vs. State and Anr.
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:18. h February, 2015 Judgment Pronounced on:27. h February, 2015 CRL.REV.P. 418/2008 SUSHIL SHARMA AND ANR. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr.R.S. Malik, Mr.Sahil Malik and Mr.Vishal Bhardwaj, Advocates . versus STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. P.K.Mishra, APP for State. Mr. Deepak Pandey Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.1. Aggrieved by the order on charge dated 04.07.2008 and framing of charge under Section 147/148/186/353/332/342 read with section 149 IPC and under Section 135 of the Electricity Act by the learned Special Judge (Electricity), the present revision petition has been filed by the petitioners.2. Factual matrix, as emerges from the record, is that BSES Rajdhani Power Limited (respondent no.2) filed a criminal complaint under Section 135 read with section 150/151 of the Electricity Act, 2003 before the learned Special Judge (Electricity) against the petitioners Sushil Sharma, P...
Tag this Judgment!