Delhi Court November 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 Kollam Internet Cable Distribution Pvt. Ltd. Vs.union of India & O ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~36 * % + W.P.(C) 9037/2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:09. 11.2016 M/S KOLLAM INTERNET CABLE DISTRIBUTION PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner versus ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Tushar Singh with Mr. Mayank Mihir Sagar, Advocates. : UNION OF INDIA & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA : Mr. Kirtiman Singh with Mr. Waize Ali Noor, Advocates for TRAI. Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker with Mr. Gajendra K., Advocates for the State of Kerela. JUDGMENT0911.2016 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) W.P.(C) 9034/2016 1. The petition has been filed seeking grant of time for installing the set-top boxes and till the completion of installation of set top boxes, the respondent be restrained from stopping the supply of analogue signal.2. The Ministry of Information & Broadcasting by Notification dated 11.11.2011 had, in public interest, notified that it shall be obligatory for every cable operator to...
Eli Lilly and Company & Anr. Vs.maiden Pharmaceuticals Limited.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:9. h November, 2016 CS(COMM) 1472/2016 ELI LILLY AND COMPANY & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Chander Lall and Ms. Kripa Pandit, Advs. Versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 MAIDEN PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Inderdeep Singh, Adv. The suit is listed in terms of order dated 26th October, 2016 of the learned Joint Registrar.2. The counsel for the plaintiffs and the counsel for the defendant have been heard.3. The plaintiffs instituted this suit, for injunction restraining infringement of trademark and passing off and for ancillary reliefs, as far back as in the year 2007 and issues were framed in the suit on 20th January, 2009. Though the plaintiffs earlier filed affidavits by way of examination-in- chief of two witnesses but none of the witnesses have been examined till now and the counsel for the plaintiffs states that the said witnesses are now no longer in the employment of the ...
Union of India & Ors. Vs.all India Cghs Employees Association & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~15. * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITON (CIVIL) No.8515/2014 Date of decision:9. h November, 2016 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Ruchir Mishra & Mr. Sanjiv K. Saxena, Advocates. versus ALL INDIA CGHS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. A.K. Behera & Mr. Nitin Kumar Jain, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): The Union of India and six others have filed the present writ petition impugning the order dated 31st January, 2014 passed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administration Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) in OA No.3441/2012, which was filed by All India CGHS Employees Association and three others, the respondents herein.2. The Tribunal has allowed the said OA and held that the officers working as Pharmacists in the Central Government Health Service (CGHS, for short) would be entitled to three financial upgradations in the grade pay of...
Texmaco Rail & Engineering Ltd vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:09. 11.2016 % + W.P.(C) 4026/2016 & CM Nos. 16980/2016, 18565/2016, 18819/2016, 19827/2016 and 19828/2016 TEXMACO RAIL & ENGINEERING LTD ....... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent/UOI : Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mr Rajiv Nayar, Senior Advocates with Ms Saanjh Purohit, Mr Tanuj Bhushan, Mr Ishan Gaur and Mr Sanyam Saxena : Mr Sanjay Jain, ASG with Ms Geetanjali Mohan, Ms Pallavi Shali, Ms Natasha Thakur and Ms Kanika Singh : Mr Rajiv S. Bhatnagar with Mr Aseem Chaturvedi and Mr Vipul Joshi : Mr K. Datta with Mr Ashish Verma and Mr Rahul Malhotra For the Intervener For the Intervener CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J1 In this writ petition cancellation of the notice inviting tender dated 02.05.2016 bearing No.2016 RSI8TC for supply of BOXNS wagons...
Faculty Association, Maulana Azad Medical College and Associated Hospi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.7049/2005 % Reserved on:2. d August, 20 9th November, 2016 Date of Decision FACULTY ASSOCIATION, MAULANA AZAD MEDICAL COLLEGE AND ASSOCIATED HOSPITAL ....Petitioner Through Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Mr. Rahul Sharma, Ms. Palak Singh, Mr. Varun K. Chopra and Mr. Chinmay Bhatt, Advocates. Versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS ..Respondents Through Mr. B.S. Shukla, Advocate for R-1-UOI. Mr. Mukul Talwar, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Amita Sahni, Advocate for GGSIP University. Mr. T. Singhdev and Mr. Biakthansangi and Mr. Tarun Verma, Advocates for R-3-MCI. Mr. Anurag Mathur, Advocate for University of Delhi. Mrs. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Padma Kumar, Advocate for respondents 6 to 10. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA SANJIV KHANNA, J.The petitioner-Faculty Association of Maulana Azad Medical College and associated hospitals namely, Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan Hospital, G.B. Pant Hospital, ...
Deputy Director of Income Tax vs.virage Logic International
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~15-17 * % + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:09. 11.2016 ITA11082007 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary and Mr. Ragvendra Singh, Advs. versus VIRAGE LOGIC INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Prakash Kumar and Mr. Ankit Vijaywargeja, Advs. ITA12492009 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary and Mr. Ragvendra Singh, Advs. versus VIRAGE LOGIC INTERNATIONAL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Prakash Kumar and Mr. Ankit Vijaywargeja, Advs. ITA1732016 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary and Mr. Ragvendra Singh, Advs. ITA11082007, 1249/2009 & 173/2016 Page 1 of 8 versus VIRAGE LOGIC INTERNATIONAL INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Prakash Kumar and Mr. Ankit Vijaywargeja, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. ...
Shashi Shekhar @ Neeraj vs.state of the Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~48. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1311/2016 SHASHI SHEKHAR @ NEERAJ Through: Ms. Neha Kapoor, Advocate. ........ Petitioner versus STATE OF THE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC and Mr.Peeyush Bhatia, Advocate, for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI % Crl. M.A. No.17197/2016 ORDER0911.2016 1. Issue notice. Mr. Mahajan accepts notice. Learned counsels have addressed their submissions in this application, as well as in the writ petition itself. Accordingly, I proceed to dispose of the present application and the writ petition.2. This application has been filed by the petitioner to direct that he be released on parole till the time Sentence Review Board (SRB) grants premature release to the petitioner. In the alternative, the petitioner prays for parole during pendency of the present writ petition. Crl. M.A. No.17197/2016 in WP(Crl.) No.1311/2016 Page 1 of 16 3. The petitioner has preferred the present writ ...
Jitendra Singh Naruka vs.university of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 6025/2014 & CM.14686/2014 Reserved on :28. h Setpember, 2016 Pronounced on :9. h November, 2016 JITENDRA SINGH NARUKA Through: Mr.R.P. Luthra, Advocate. ........ Petitioner versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Amit Bansal, Ms.Seema Dolo & Ms.Surbhi Mehta, Advs for respondent No.1 Mr.Bhagwan Swarup Shukla, CGSC Ms.Priti, Advocate for Union of India Mr.V.Sudeer & Ms.Monica Yadav, Advocates for the respondent no.3 and CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA SANJIV KHANNA, J.1. Dr.Jitendra Singh Naruka, in this writ petition has made the following prayers: the committee, (i) Declare the recommendations dated 23rd January, 2013 of notification no.DU/124/LEGAL/HC-4310/2011 dated 20th October, 2012 and also its approval by the vice chancellor, as illegal and unconstitutional. constituted under WP(C)6025/2014 Page 1 of 23 (ii) Declare the E.C.Res. No.142 dated 6th October, 2009...
Jagdish Nautiyal vs.state of Nct (Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: October 04, 2016 Judgment Delivered on: November 09, 2016 CRL.A. 210/2015 JAGDISH NAUTIYAL ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms. Anjana Prakash, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anwesh Madhukar, Mr. Anuj Prakash and Mr. S.C. Nautiyal, Advocates. versus STATE OF NCT (DELHI) ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Rajni Gupta, APP for the CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.State.1. Convicted for offences punishable under SectionsIPC Jagdish Nautiyal challenges the impugned judgment dated January 07, 2015 and the order on sentence dated January 12, 2015 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of 75,000/- each for offences punishable under Sections 493 IPC and 376 IPC.2. Assailing the conviction, learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that Section 375 clause fourthly is not applicable to the facts of the case. Firstly, for the reason the prosecutrix knew that...
K vs.the State Govt of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI K Decided on:9. h November, 2016 CRL.M.C. 4/2016 Represented by: Mr. Bharat Dubey, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP with SI Vishvendra, PS Seema Puri. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. The name of the petitioner/prosecutrix has not been mentioned in order to avoid her identity.2. On the complaint of the petitioner FIR No.150/2010 under Section 376(2)(G) IPC was registered at PS Seema Puri. In her complaint the complainant stated that she was residing at Dilshad Colony for the last about 3 months and had met Amit Modi and Pushpash Aggarwal about 1 months ago when she requested them to give her an employment. Two of them employed her in their company. Thereafter Amit Modi started frequently visiting her house. On 21st May, 2010 at about 8.00 PM, on the pretext of discussing some official work, he visited her residence and after so...
- ‹ Prev
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- Next ›
- Last »