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.
Rajinder Singh Rana vs.c B I
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :7. h OCTOBER, 2016 DECIDED ON :3. d NOVEMBER, 2016 + CRL.M.B. 1420/2016 in CRL.A. 715/2016 + AND + RAJINDER SINGH RANA ..... Appellant C B I Through : Mr.Arvind Nigam, Sr.Advocate with versus Mr.K.K.Manan, Sr.Advocate, Mr.Harsh K. Sharma, Ms.Ragini, Ms.Vaibhavi Sharma, Ms.Mehak Nakra, Mr.Rohit Gaur & Mr.Raghav Ghei, Advocates. ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Sanjeev Bhandari, SPP. CRL.M.B. 1436/2016 in CRL.A. 726/2016 MILAN KUMAR DEY ..... Appellant CBI Through : Mr.Ramesh Gupta, Sr.Advocate with versus Mr.Aditya K.Choudhary, Mr.Ajay P.Tushir & Mr.Inderjeet Sinha, Advocates. ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Sanjeev Bhandari, SPP. CRL.M.B. 1421/2016 in CRL.A. 716/2016 RAJU DHANAPAL RAJ ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Harsh K.Sharma, Advocate with Crl.M.B.1420/2016 & connected matters. Page 1 of 6 C B I versus Ms.Ragini, Ms.Vaibhavi Sharma, Ms.Mehak Nakra, Mr.Rohit Gaur & Mr.Raghav Ghei, Advocates. ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Sanjeev Bhand...
Victory Digital Private Limited vs.mib & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:03. 11.2016 VICTORY DIGITAL PRIVATE LIMITED versus ........ Petitioner ....... RESPONDENTS $~11 * % + W.P.(C) 7185/2016 Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS MIB & ORS. : : None. Mr Vikas Mahajan and Mr Amit Mehta, Advocates for Union of India. Mr Abhishek Malhotra and Mr Rijul Taneja, Advocates for the applicant. Mr Yashvardhan, Mr Himanshu Kulshreshtha and Mr Devender Singh, Advocates for Intervener. Mr Kirtiman Singh, Mr Waize Ali Noor and Mr Pranav Agrawal, Advocates for TRAI. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT0311.2016 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) W.P.(C) 7185/2016 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-to...
Yogesh Cable Networks vs.ministry of Information & Broadcasting & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2016
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(C) 7196/2016 Judgment delivered on:03. 11.2016 YOGESH CABLE NETWORKS ........ Petitioner versus MINISTRY OF INFORMATION & BROADCASTING & ORS. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS None. : : ....... RESPONDENTS Mr Vikas Mahajan and Mr Amit Mehta, Advocates for Union of India. Mr Abhishek Malhotra and Mr Rijul Taneja, Advocates for the applicant. Mr Yashvardhan, Mr Himanshu Kulshreshtha and Mr Devender Singh, Advocates for Intervener. Mr Kirtiman Singh, Mr Waize Ali Noor and Mr Pranav Agrawal, Advocates for TRAI. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT0311.2016 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) W.P.(C) 7196/2016 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. W.P.(C) No.7196/2016 Page 1 of 4 2. The petition has...
Ravinder Kumar Verma vs.laxmi Narayan Mandir Nirman Sabha & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:03. 11.2016 RC.REV. 511/2016 $~A-39 * % + RAVINDER KUMAR VERMA ........ Petitioner Through Mr.C.Mukund, Mr.Gaurav Kr.Singh & Mr.Nagender Yadav, Advocates. versus LAXMI NARAYAN MANDIR NIRMAN SABHA & ANR Through None ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) CM No.39287/2016 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. RC.REV. No.511/2016 and CM Nos. 39286/2016 (stay) & 39288/2016 (delay) 1. The present revision petition is filed under Section 25 (B) (8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as DRC Act) seeking to impugn the order dated 23.04.2016 passed by the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) dismissing the application of the petitioner for grant of leave to defend and consequently, passing an order of eviction against the petitioner.2. The respondents have filed the present eviction petition against the petitioner under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section...
Param Prakash vs.laxmi Narayan Mandir Nirman Sabha & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:03. 11.2016 $~A-44 * % + RC.REV. 517/2016 & CM Nos. 39451-453/2016 PARAM PRAKASH ........ Petitioner Through Mr.C.Mukund, Mr.Gaurav Kr.Singh & Mr.Nagender Yadav, Advocates. versus LAXMI NARAYAN MANDIR NIRMAN SABHA & ANR Through None ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) The present revision petition is filed under Section 25 (B) (8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the DRC Act) seeking to impugn the order dated 23.04.2016 by which the application for leave to defend of the petitioner was dismissed and an eviction order was passed regarding shop No.D-1/4, Ground Floor of Laxmi Narayan Mandir, D-Block, Jafrabad Road, New Seelampur, Delhi-110053. Six identical petitions were filed by the respondents for different shops located on the ground floor. The ARC has passed a common order regarding the same. Against the eviction order dated 23.04.2016 pertaining to another...
Sumit vs.preeti @ Priya
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2016
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUMIT Judgement Reserved on : October 27, 2016 Judgment Delivered on : November 03, 2016 MAT.APP.(F.C.) 65/2016 Represented by: Mr.Arvind Kumar, Advocate ..... Appellant versus PREETI @ PRIYA ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.S.K. Rai, Advocate with Respondent in person CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Sumit and Preeti solemnized their marriage on February 25, 2012 as per Hindu Rites and Ceremonies. They were blessed with a girl child on February 23, 2013 who, is currently with Preeti.2. Sumit filed a petition seeking dissolution of the marriage by grant of a decree of divorce pleading cruelty before the Principal Judge, Family Court at Rohini on January 04, 2014. Counsel for Preeti was negligent. She did not file a written statement. Sans her defence she had to rely upon the pleadings, the evidence led by Sumit and his cross-examination by her counsel.3. Notwithstanding ...
Ravi Gupta & Ors vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2016
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 2155/2016 & Crl.M.A. No.9113/2016 Date of Decision: November 3rd, 2016 RAVI GUPTA & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Arvind Kumar Gupta and Mr.Anshul Garg, Advs. Through: Ms.Manjeet Arya, APP. Mr.M.Mukul, Advocate for R-2. ........ RESPONDENTS STATE & ANR versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by 1. the petitioners, namely, Sh. Ravi Gupta, Sh. Rajendra Kumar Gupta and Smt. Asha Gupta for quashing of FIR No.111/2013 dated 06.03.2013, under Sections 498-A/4IPC registered at Police Station Pandav Nagar on the basis of the compromise deed executed between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, namely, Smt. Neha Gupta on 12.08.2015.2. 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. the 3. marriage was solemnized between the petitioner no.1...
Sh. Jawahar Lal (Since Deceased) Through Lrs and Ors. Vs.sh. Amar Nath ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RSA Nos.229/2007 & 230/2007 RSA No.229/2007 3rd November, 2016 * + % 1. SH. JAWAHAR LAL (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Vishesh Issar, Advocate with Mr. Jaskaran Singh, Advocate. versus SH. AMAR NATH (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Pushkar Sood, Advocate with Mr. Satya Prakash, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 6. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi, Advocate for respondent Nos.6(a) and (b).2. SH. BRIJ MOHAN SRIVASTAVA AND ORS. RSA No.230/2007 and C.M. No.11864/2007 (stay) ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Vishesh Issar, Advocate with Mr. Jaskaran Singh, Advocate. versus SHRI DES RAJ AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Pushkar Sood, Advocate with Mr. Satya Prakash, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 6. Mr. Sunil Satyarthi, Advocate for respondent Nos.6(a) and (b). RSA Nos.229/2007 & 230/2007 Page 1 of 11 CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VA...
Aktiebolaget Volvo & Ors vs.hari Satya Lubricants & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2016
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 03, 2016 CS(OS) 1771/2014, CRL.M.A No.4410/2015 AKTIEBOLAGET VOLVO & ORS Through: Mr. Raunaq Kamath, Adv. ..... Plaintiff versus HARI SATYA LUBRICANTS & ANR ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv. with Mr. Vinay Kumar Shukla, Adv. for D-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT V. KAMESWAR RAO, J1 This suit has been filed by the plaintiffs, organized under the laws of Sweden with the following prayers:-"for permanent injunction restraining a) An order the Defendants, their principal officers, partners, sister concerns, licensees, servants, representatives and agents or any of them, from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale in India, offering for export, packaging, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in manufacturing and supplying of the lubricating oil products or any goods whatsoever under the mark 'VALVO' or any other trademark identical and/or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs ...
Poonam vs.guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2016
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on:05. h October, 2016 Judgment Delivered on:03. d November, 2016 + W.P.(C) 8242/2016 POONAM ........ Petitioner versus GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners: Mr. Aditya Jain, Adv For the... RESPONDENTS: Ms. Anita Sahani, Adv. for R-1 Mr. Atul Kumar, Adv. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J1 The... Petitioners seek a mandamus thereby directing the... RESPONDENTS to give admission to the petitioner in the college under Respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as the University) and a direction to Respondent No.2 Central Board of Secondary Education (hereinafter referred to as the CBSE) to declare that the petitioner has cleared class 12th examination with more than 50% marks. ===================================================================== WP(C) 8242/2016 Page 1 of 17 2. It is contended t...
- ‹ Prev
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- Next ›
- Last »