Delhi Court October 2016 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.
M/S a P L Industries Ltd vs.the Securities Exchange Board of India & O ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2016
$~23. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8731/2014 and CM APPL. 20066/2014, CRL.M.A. 7324/2015 1. M/S A P L INDUSTRIES LTD ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rohit Choudhry, Advocate with Ms. Preeti Kohli, Advocate versus THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Advocate with Ms. Surekha Raman and Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Advocates for R-1/SEBI. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate for R-2/Canara Bank. Mr. Sartaj Singh, Advocate for R-3/PNB. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia ORDER1710.2016 for issuing a writ of certiorari, quashing a communication dated 17.11.2014 issued by the respondent No.1/Securities Exchange Board of India (in short 7SEBI), calling upon it to pay the principal and interest to the share applicants, who had applied for its shares under a Public Issue in terms of the order dated 14.01.2013 passed in an earlier petition filed by...
Vimal Kumar Wadhwa & Anr. Vs.state & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2016
* + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on : October 17, 2016 CRL.M.C. 699/2016 & Crl.M.A. No.3063/2016 VIMAL KUMAR WADHWA & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Ms.Kirti Parmar, Advocate versus STATE & ORS. Through: Mr.G.M. Farooqui, Additional Public ........ RESPONDENTS Prosecutor for the State. Mr.K.S. Singh with Ms.Tripta, Advocates for Respondent No.3 & 4. CRL.M.C. 2181/2016 & Crl.M.A. No.9202/2016 RAJ KUMAR WADHWA & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.K.S. Singh with Ms.Tripta, Advocates. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.G.M. Farooqui, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Ms.Kirti Parmar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 & 5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI JUDGMENT P.S.TEJI, J.1. By these petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 06.01.2016 passed by Special Page 1 of 9 Crl. M.C.No.699/2016 & 2181/2016 Executive Magistrate, South East District, thereby the petiti...
s.s.a International Ltd vs.union of India & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2016
$~R-209 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision: October 17, 2016 FAO2002010 & C.M.13646/2016 S.S.A INTERNATIONAL LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.M. Popli, Mr. Anuj Saxena Versus and Mr. Yogesh Bhardwaj, Advocates UNION OF INDIA & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr.A.S. Dateer, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % (ORAL) JUDGMENT Appellants claim petition seeking refund of `78,05,260/- with interest stands dismissed by Railway Claim Tribunal vide impugned order of 2nd June, 2009 by holding that the under charges were correctly imposed upon appellant. The factual matrix of this case is already noted in the impugned order and needs no reproduction. It is the case of appellant that consignment of Paddy Husk (hereinafter referred to as Bhoosa) was sent from Bihar to Panipat on 24th February, 2007 whereas it is the case of respondents that during the course of preventive check conducted by the Vigilance Department of respondents at Panipat on 27th February,...
Surendra Kumar Verma vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2016
$~20. * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION(C) No.9352/2016 Date of decision:17. h October, 2016 SURENDRA KUMAR VERMA ........ Petitioner Through Mr. R.K. Kapoor & Ms. Rekha Giri, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Through Mr. Dev. P. Bhardwaj, CGSC for UOI. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): CM No.37555/2016 Exemption application is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) No.9352/2016 This writ petition impugns the order dated 1st October, 2015 passed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) whereby OA No.3503/2011 filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. The present writ petition has been filed nearly a year after the impugned order was passed and, therefore, is delayed and hit by laches.2. Even on merits, we do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal.3. In OA No.3503/2011, the pet...
Sanjay Singh & Ors vs.the State (Govt of Nct of Delhi) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2016
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 969/2016 SANJAY SINGH & ORS Date of Decision: October 17th, 2016 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. R.S. Sirohi, Advocate Versus THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Sh. Sanjay Singh, Smt. Munni Devi @ Chander Prabha, Sh. Nagender Singh and Sh. Shyam Singh @ Shivender Singh for quashing of FIR No.244/2008 dated 16.08.2008, under Sections 498-A/4IPC registered at Police Station Aman Vihar on the basis settlement arrived at between the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, namely, Smt. Nirmala Devi.2. respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2, present in the Court has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question by her counsel.3. The factual matrix of the present case is ...
Delhi Transport Corporation vs.prem Nath Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5833/2016 Date of Decision:17. h October, 2016 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Purvesh Buttan, Adv. versus PREM NATH SHARMA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Ms. and Mr. Pratishtha Vij Rhishabh Jaitly, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA SANJIV KHANNA, J: (ORAL) 1. The petitioner-Delhi Transport Corporation in this writ petition impugns the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, dated 25.02.2016 whereby the O.A. 4259 of 2014 filed by the respondent-Prem Nath Sharma, has been allowed and the petitioner has been directed to consider the respondent for grant of 3rd financial upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Scheme (MACP). The said exercise has to be completed within two months. The Tribunal has quashed the order dated 24.09.2013 whereby the respondent's request for grant of 3rd financial upgradation was decli...
Ghanshyam Dass vs.rajender Kumar Kalra & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2016
$~A-42 * % + RC.REV. 495/2016 Date of Decision:17. 10.2016 ........ Petitioner IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI GHANSHYAM DASS Through Mr.V.K. Khurana, Advocate. versus RAJENDER KUMAR KALRA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Ratan K. Singh, Mr.Nikhilesh Iyer, and Mr. Krishnan, Mr. Abhishek Mr.Aishwarya Tiwari Nishank Tyagi, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) CAVEAT No.897/2016 Since the counsel for the respondent has entered appearance, the caveat stands discharged. CM No.38030-31/2016 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. RC.REV. 495/2016 and CM No.38029/2016 (stay) 1. The present petition is filed under Section 25 B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act seeking to impugn the order of eviction passed by the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) dated 13.07.2016 against the petitioner and dismissing the application for leave to defend. R.C.REV. 495/2016 Page 1 2. The respondents No.1 and 2 filed the present eviction peti...
Raj Kumar Wadhwa & Anr. Vs.state (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2016
* + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on : October 17, 2016 CRL.M.C. 699/2016 & Crl.M.A. No.3063/2016 VIMAL KUMAR WADHWA & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Ms.Kirti Parmar, Advocate versus STATE & ORS. Through: Mr.G.M. Farooqui, Additional Public ........ RESPONDENTS Prosecutor for the State. Mr.K.S. Singh with Ms.Tripta, Advocates for Respondent No.3 & 4. CRL.M.C. 2181/2016 & Crl.M.A. No.9202/2016 RAJ KUMAR WADHWA & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.K.S. Singh with Ms.Tripta, Advocates. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.G.M. Farooqui, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Ms.Kirti Parmar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 & 5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI JUDGMENT P.S.TEJI, J.1. By these petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 06.01.2016 passed by Special Page 1 of 9 Crl. M.C.No.699/2016 & 2181/2016 Executive Magistrate, South East District, thereby the petiti...
Bharat Bhushan @ Bhagwan Das vs.rajesh & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2016
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:17. h October, 2016 CRL.M.C. 2312/2016 & Crl.M.A. 9684/2016 (stay) BHARAT BHUSHAN @ BHAGWAN DAS Represented by: Mr. S.C. Singhal, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) RAJESH & ANR Represented by: Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, APP. ..... Respondent 1. The petitioner filed a complaint before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate seeking directions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. as no FIR was registered on the complaint of the petitioner by the SHO of PS Palam on the complaint dated 30th May, 2014.2. In the complaint filed under Section 200 Cr.P.C. against one Rajesh the respondent No.1 herein, the petitioner alleged that he had purchased property in khasra No.89/of village Palam bearing No.89/having two shops constructed vide Agreement to Sell, GPA, Affidavit, Receipt dated 29th November, 1988 which was duly notarized by its erstwhile owner Smt. Prem Lata for a total consideration of 95,0...
Times Centre for Learning Limited vs.bennett, Coleman & Company Limite ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CO.APPL. (M) 141/2016 IN THE MATTER OF: TIMES CENTRE FOR LEARNING LIMITED Applicant/ Demerged Company AND BENNETT, COLEMAN & COMPANY LIMITED ... Non Applicant/Resulting Company Through: Mr. Vikrant Rohilla and Akul Mehandru, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL ORDER1710.2016 1. The present is an application for first motion, filed under Sections 391(1) and 393 of the Companies Act, 1956, read with Rules 6 and 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, by the Applicant Company seeking directions of this Court to dispense with the requirement of convening and holding separate meetings of the Equity Shareholders, Preference Shareholders, Debenture Holders and Unsecured Creditors of the Applicant Company, to consider and approve, with or without modifications, the proposed Scheme of Arrangement between Times CO.APPL.(M) 141/2016 Page 1 of 10 Centre for Learning Limited (hereinafter referred to as Applicant/Demerged Company) and Bennett...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »