Delhi Court June 2015 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.
Alstom T and D India Ltd. Vs. Schneider Electric Infrastructure Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:29. h June , 2015 % + I.A. Nos.7292/2014 & 24002/2014 in CS(OS) No.1121/2014 ALSTOM T AND D INDIA LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Sunil Dalal, Mr.Sanjeev Narula & Ms.Sanjana Sharma, Advs. versus SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. ..... Defendant Through Mr.A.S. Chandhiok, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Rishi Kapoor, Adv. with Mr.Parijat Kishore, Ms.Harleen Singh, Mr.Ranjit Pandey and Mr.Parminder Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff has filed the above mentioned suit, inter alia, praying for declaration, decree of recovery of Rs.3,87,18,000/- along with interest and costs, and also a decree of permanent injunction against the defendant.2. Along with the plaint the plaintiff has filed an application being I.A. No.7292/2014 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying, inter alia, for restrainin...
Ram Dilawri and Anr. Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on :29. h June, 2015 % + CRL.M.C. 3115/2011 RAM DILAWRI & ANR. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Manish Aggarwal, Adv. With Vikram Saini, Adv. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Malhotra, Sr.Adv. with Mr. Mahir Malhotra, Adv. for the complainant. Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, Sr.Adv. with Mr. Rishabh Bansal, Ms. Manmeet Arora, Adv. for applicants i.e. Daljit Singh and Sarvjit Singh in Crl.M.A. No.3354/2015 Mr.M.N. Dudeja, APP for State CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for setting aside the order dated 11th July, 2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-03, South East, Saket Courts, New Delhi, whereby the criminal revision of the respondent was allowed and the petitioners were asked to face the trial in the matter.2. FIR No.517/2006 in the present case was registered under Sections 420/120B IPC on the comp...
Vijender @ Teetu and Anr. Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-2015
I-17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:29. h June, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 2546/2015 VIJENDER @ TEETU & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Naveen Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with SI Ashok Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.477/2014, under Section 324/34 of IPC registered at police station Fatehpur Beri, Delhi is sought on the basis of Compromise Deed of 20th May, 2015 (Annexure-B ) and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR now stands cleared between the parties. Notice. Mr. Naveen Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and he has been identified to be so by SI Ashok on the basis of identity proof Crl...
Smt. Kamlesh Vs. Rajinder Kumar Aggarwal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Review Petition No.309/2015 in RSA No.124/2013 29th June, 2015 % SMT. KAMLESH Through: ..... Appellant Mr. P.K.Bajaj and Mr. S.P.S.Tyagi, Advocates. versus RAJINDER KUMAR AGGARWAL Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) Review Petition No.309/2015 (for review of the order dated 24.2.2014) & CM No.11055/2015 (condonation of delay of 40 days) & CM No.11057/2015(stay) 1. This review petition filed under Section 114 and Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), alongwith the accompanying applications for condonation of delay allegedly only of 40 days in filing the review petition, with the accompanying application for stay has been filed in the Regular Second Appeal which was disposed of on 24.2.2014 in terms of a consent order granting the appellant/review petitioner/tenant time to vacate the suit premises by 30.6.2015 i.e tom...
Eicher Goodearth Pvt Ltd Vs. Krishna Mehta and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-2015
.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:29. h June, 2015 % + I.A. No.8010/2014 (Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC), I.A. No.13372/2014 (Order 39 Rule 4 CPC) in CS(OS) 1234/2014 EICHER GOODEARTH PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff Through Mrs.Pratibha M. Singh, Sr. Adv. along with Ms.Bitika Sharma & Mr.Kapil Midha, Advs. versus KRISHNA MEHTA & ORS Through ..... Defendants Ms.Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Tushar Gupta & Mr.Vasav Anantharaman, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff has filed a suit for permanent injunction, passing off, unfair competition, dilution, rendition of accounts and damages etc. against the defendants. Along with the suit, the plaintiff has also filed an application for injunction. The matter was listed before Court on 1st May, 2014 when the summons were issued to the defendants. In the interim application, after hearing, the Court restrained the defendants and their family members, partners/promoters, Director...
Madhu Transport Company Pvt Ltd and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-2015
* + HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 5124/2014 & W.P.(C) 5127/2014 Decided on :29. h June, 2015 W.P.(C) 5124/2014 MADHU TRANSPORT COMPANY PVT LTD & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Prateek Jalan, Mr. Surendra Dube, Mr. Ankit Yadav, Ms. Sonia Dube, Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, Ms. Kanchan Yadav & Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Jagjit Singh, Ms. Manita Verma, Ms. Nisha & Mr. Shivanshu Bajpai, Advs. W.P.(C) 5127/2014 JAI BALAJI INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ANR. Through: WP(C) Nos.5124/2014 & 5127/2014 ..... Petitioners Mr. Prateek Jalan, Mr. Surendra Dube, Mr. Ankit Yadav, Ms. Sonia Dube, Ms. Kanchan Yadav & Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Jagjit Singh, Ms. Manita Verma, Ms. Nisha & Mr. Shivanshu Bajpai, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.1. In both these writ petitions, the challenge has been laid to orders dated 13.06.2014 & 18.06.2014 respectively pas...
Keyence Corporation Vs. Vachhani Jalpa Pankaj
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 3690/2014 KEYENCE CORPORATION ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Aditya Gupta, Adv. versus VACHHANI JALPA PANKAJ Through: ..... Defendant None. Reserved On :19. h May, 2015 Date of Decision:29. h June, 2015 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J:1. Present suit has been filed for permanent injunction for infringement and passing off of plaintiffs trademark KEYENCE as well as unfair competition, dilution, damages, etc. The prayers in the plaint are reproduced hereinbelow:a. An order for permanent injunction restraining the defendant, its principal officers, servants, agents, their affiliates, subsidiaries, distributors, and all other acting for and on their behalf from using the impugned mark KEYENCE WATER SYSTEM including as a trademark, trade name, domain name, and/or any other name, word, domain name or mark which is deceptively or confusingly similar to the plaintiffs registered trademark KEYENCE in any manner for any ...
Jai Ram Vs. Prem Lata and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-2015
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + R.S.A. No.21/2005 Decided on :29. h June, 2015 JAI RAM ..... Appellant Through: Mr.J.C.Mahindroo, Adv. versus PREM LATA & ORS. ...... Respondent Through: Mr.T.S.Upadhyay, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.1. This is a regular second appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 18.10.2004 passed by the first appellate court in RCA No.12/2004 setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial court vide order dated 06.04.2004.2. Thought the present regular second appeal was filed in the year 2005, however, after almost seven years on 03.10.2012, the following substantial question of law was framed by my learned predecessor:Whether on the basis of evidence on record the first appellate court was justified in reversing the judgment of the learned Civil Judge. 3. Thereafter, the matter was admitted and it has been finally heard.4. Before dealing the substantial question of law which has been formulated by...
Sunil Kumar Vs. Satish Kumar Wanchoo
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-2015
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + R.S.A. No.171/2015 & C.M. No.8110/2015 Decided on :29. h June, 2015 SUNIL KUMAR Through: Appellant Mr. Sudhir Naagar & Mr. G.P. Sah, Advocates. Versus SATISH KUMAR WANCHOO Respondent Through: Counsel for the respondent. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.1. This is a regular second appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 19.2.2015 passed by Sh. Kuldeep Narayan, the learned Additional District Judge, Shahdara District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in R.C.A. No.65/2014 titled Sunil Kumar vs. Satish Kumar Wanchoo.2. Before dealing with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, it may be pertinent here to give brief facts of the case. The respondent/plaintiff, Satish Kumar Wanchoo, is the owner and landlord of Flat No.E-01, Indraprastha Apartments, I.P. Extension, Patparganj, Delhi-92. His case was that he had let out the aforesaid flat to the present appellant/tenant, Sunil Kumar, on a lease of 11 mo...
Anuradha Kalra Vs. The Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-29-2015
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C). No.5072/2013 Decided on :29. h June, 2015 ANURADHA KALRA Through: Appellant Mr. Arun Malik & Mr. A.B. Pandey, Advocates. Versus THE DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Respondent Through: Ms. Manika Tripathy Pandey, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.1. This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has sought the following three reliefs :a. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ and/or order quashing the letter, bearing No.F125(359) 97/SFS/VK II and dated nil, vide which the respondent has rejected the request of the petitioner for delivery of possession of the flat bearing no.6001/1, Sector-D, Pocket-6B, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. b. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ and/or order directing the Respondent to transfer the flat bearing no.6001/1, Sector-D, Pocket-6B, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi to the name of the petitioner; ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »