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 Riddhi Vision vs.the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting & An ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~34 * % + W.P.(C) 9031/2016 M/S RIDDHI VISION versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:09. 11.2016 ........ Petitioner THE MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate. : : Mr. Kirtiman Singh with Mr. Waize Ali Noor, Advocates for TRAI. JUDGMENT0911.2016 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) W.P.(C) 9031/2016 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 transmit or re-transmit programmes of any channel in an encrypted form through a Digital Addressable System W....
Commissioner of Income Tax-3 International Taxation vs.virage Logic In ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~16-17 * % + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:09. 11.2016 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. 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. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(Oral) For detailed judgment, see judgment dated 09.11.2016 passed in ITA12492009 & 173/2016 Page 1 of 2 connected matter ITA No.1108/2007 Deputy Director of Income Tax vs Virage Logic International. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J NAJMI WAZIRI, J NOVEMBER09 2016/kk ITA12492009 ...
Amit Ved vs.guljinder Singh & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~A-3 * % + AMIT VED Through Mr. Amarjeet Singh Sahni, Advocate. ........ Petitioner CM(M) 1080/2016 versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:09. 11.2016 GULJINDER SINGH & ANR Through Mr. Arav Kapoor, Advocate for R-2.. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) CM No.39626-27/2016 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CM(M) 1080/2016 and CM No.39625/2016 (stay) 1. By the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to impugn the order dated 01.09.2016 by which an application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was dismissed.2. Respondent No.1 has filed the suit against respondent No.2 for mandatory injunction. In the suit, it is prayed that respondent No.2 be directed to re-install the electricity meter or install a new electricity meter and restore the electricity supply. As per the plaint, respondent No.1 states that his grandfather la...
State vs.dinesh Kumar @ Master & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~8 * + % STATE IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL. L.P. 73/2016 & Crl. M A No.1716/2016 Date of Judgment:9. h November, 2016 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Varun Goswami, Advocate. Versus ....... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Anupam Sharma, Advocate DINESH KUMAR @ MASTER & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present leave to appeal has been filed by the State under Section 378 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, being aggrieved by the judgment dated 27.04.2015 passed by the Sessions Judge in Sessions case No.1by virtue of which the respondents were acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 302/120B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC).2. The facts of the present case as noticed by the trial court are as under: 2. The facts in brief, as stated in the charge sheet are that on 16.01.2013 vide DD No.11 A an information was recorded about one person having been shot at Railway line betwee...
Mukul Kumar vs.indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.5027/2016 & CM Nos. 20985/2016 (stay) + % MUKUL KUMAR9h November, 2016 Through: ........ Petitioner Mr. Anupam Lal Das and Mr. Sahil Monga, Advocates. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. & ANR. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. V.N.Kaura and Mr. P.K.Benipal, Advovcates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner impugns the Letter dated 2.5.2016 issued by the respondent no.1/Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. removing the petitioner as a trustee of the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Employees Superannuation Benefit Fund ( SBF) Trust.2. The Trust Deed admittedly contains Clause 4.2 dealing with the appointment and removal of trustees and this Clause 4.2 gives a final power to the Chairman of respondent no.1 to remove a trustee by giving a 7 days notice in writing to the trustee. This ...
Parkash Singh & Ors vs.c.viswanath
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~8 * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CONT.CAS(C) 567/2014 PARKASH SINGH & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. R.M. Sinha with Mr. Chandan Kumar, Advs. versus C.VISWANATH ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Om Prakash, Adv. Date of Decision:09. h November, 2016 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. The present contempt petition has been filed with the following prayers:-"a)Summon and hold the respondent/contemnor guilty of committing the wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order and judgment dated 23.08.2013 of this Honble High Court pronounced in WP(C) No.3256/2010 titled as FCI Handling Workers Union v/s Union of India & Ors; and b)Direct the respondent/contemnor to purge the contempt by making promotions to the petitioners in accordance with the depot-wise seniority as per the rectified list of Sarders and Mondals (Annexure-P/2) issued pursuant to the Circular No.07/2006 dated 23/24.02.2006 as upheld by this Honble CONT.CAS(C) 567/2014 Pag...
Attar Singh & Ors vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + WP(C) No.9549/2015 & CM225202015 Judgment delivered on:09. 11.2016 ATTAR SINGH & ORS versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ....... Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: : Mr Rajiv Kumar Ghawana : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi. For the... Petitioner For the Respondent L&B/LAC CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioners seek the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) in respect of which Award No.20/1985-86 dated 11.11.1985 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners land com...
M/S Kollam Cables Private Limited & Anr vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~35 * % + W.P.(C) 9034/2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:09. 11.2016 M/S KOLLAM CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR ........ Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA None. : : 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. Notice was directed to be issued to the petitioner since this matter has been received on transfer from Supreme Court. Affidavit of service has been filed indicating that the notice has been duly served on the petitioner.2. 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. W....
State vs.sonu @ Sunil & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. No.1072/2013 Date of Decision:09. 11.2016 STATE Through Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for ..... Appellant State. versus SONU @ SUNIL & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through Ms.Inderjeet Sidhu, Advocate for R-1(Amicus Curiae) CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA GITA MITTAL, J (Oral) 1. A status report dated 08.09.2016 under the signatures of Inspector Manjeet Tomar, SHO, Police Station GTB Enclave has been filed confirming that respondent No.2 Pawan Sharma expired on 6.11.2014. A copy of the death certificate has been placed on record. In view thereof the appeal qua respondent No.2 abates.2. We have heard Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, learned APP for the State and Ms.Inderjeet Sidhu, amicus curiae, for respondent No.1.3. In this appeal by the State against the acquittal of the Crl. App.No.1072/2013 Page 1 of 4 respondent in the case S.C No.arising out of FIR No.3registered by Police Station M.S.Park, the respondent Sonu @...
Santosh Kumar & Ors. Vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:09. 11.2016 % + WP(C) No.6763/2014 SANTOSH KUMAR & ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ....... Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent UOI For the Respondent L&B/LAC For the Respondent DDA : Mr Rishi Malhotra with Mr Rajat Roshan Sharma : Ms Saroj Bidawat : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi :Mr Dhanesh Relan with Ms Isha Garg CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioners seek the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act), which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding, which is the subject- matter of the present petition, ought to be deemed to have lapsed in view of...
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »