Delhi Court December 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.
Sms Paryavaran Ltd & Ors vs.intergen Energy Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2016
* % + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:19. h December, 2016 CRL.M.C. 4724/2016 SMS PARYAVARAN LTD & ORS ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Gagan Chhabra, Ms. Richa Narang, Mr. Mayank Chawla & Mr. Rohit Puri, Advs. versus INTERGEN ENERGY LTD Represented by: CRL.M.C. 4746/2016 SMS PARYAVARAN LTD & ORS. ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Gagan Chhabra, Ms. Richa Narang, Mr. Mayank Chawla & Mr. Rohit Puri, Advs. versus INTERGEN ENERGY LTD. Represented by: CRL.M.C. 4747/2016 SMS PARYAVARAN LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Gagan Chhabra, Ms. Richa Narang, Mr. Mayank Chawla & Mr. Rohit Puri, Advs. versus INTERGEN ENERGY LTD. Represented by: ..... Respondent Page 1 of 8 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. No.19677/2016 in CRL.M.C. 4724/2016. Crl. M.A. No.19734/2016 in CRL.M.C. 4746/2016. Crl. M.A. No.19736/2016 in CRL.M.C. 4747/2016. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptio...
Bharti Airtel Ltd. And Anr. Vs.uoi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. 08.2016 Pronounced on:19. 12.2016 + W.P.(C) 2166/2012 BHARTI AIRTEL LTD. AND ANR. Petitioner Through: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Somnath Shukla, Advocate. Versus UOI AND ANR. ....Respondents Through: Sh. Rahul Chaudhary, Sr. Standing Counsel with Sh. Raghvendra Singh, Jr. Standing Counsel and Sh. Anup Kumar Kesari, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The... Petitioner, a telecommunications service provider, engaged the services of both domestic (resident) and foreign (non-resident) entities for providing interconnections to its users. The purview of this petition is restricted to the payments made to non-residents. In engaging the non- resident entities for interconnections, some charges were accrued - which were paid by the... Petitioner to those foreign entities. Based on these payments made, the second respondent issued several Sho...
Air Factory Energy Limited vs.anest Iwata Motherson Private Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved On:22. 11.2016 Judgment Pronounced On:19.12.2016 CO.PET. 634/2016 IN THE MATTER OF:-"AIR FACTORY ENERGY LIMITED .PETITIONER/TRANSFEROR COMPANY AND ANEST IWATA MOTHERSON PRIVATE LIMITED .PETITIONER /TRANSFEREE COMPANY Through: Mr Manoj Kumar Garg and Mr Prem Mardi, Advocates for petitioner. Ms Aparna Mudiam, Asst. ROC for RD. Ms Ruchi Sindhwani, Advocate for OL. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J1 The present petition has been filed jointly, under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by Air Factory CO.PET. 634/2016 Page 1 of 1 Energy Limited (hereinafter referred as Transferor Company) and Anest Iwata Motherson Private Limited (hereinafter referred as Transferee Company) seeking sanction of the Scheme of Amalgamation (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme) of the Transferor Company with the Transferee Company.2. The Transferor Company and the Tra...
Modi-Mundipharma Pvt. Ltd. Vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2016
Judgment delivered on:19. 12.2016 $~48 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(C) 11802/2016 MODI-MUNDIPHARMA PVT. LTD. versus ........ Petitioner UNION OF INDIA & ORS .... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : Mr Dhruv Mehta, Senior Advocate with Mr.N.S.Ahluwalia, Mr Salil Seth and Mr Hansdeep Singh, Advocates. Ms Ruchi Jain, Advocate for R-1. Mr Kirtiman Singh and Mr Waize Ali Noor, Advocates for NPPA CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1912.2016 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) CM No.46581/2016(exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 11802/2016 & CM No.46580/2016(stay) 1. The petitioner impugns the notification, i.e. standing order No.1687(E) dated 09.05.2016 as also the letter of 05.07.2016 and the WP(C) 11802/2016 Page 1 of 4 order/letter dated 19.09.2016 rejecting the review application of the petitioner on the ground that the same has been filed after a period of thirty days of the publ...
Din Mohd. @ Dinu vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2016
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:19. h December, 2016 CRL.A. 900/2016 & Crl.M.B. 1719/2016 DIN MOHD. @ DINU ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Azhar Qayum, Advocate. STATE versus Represented by: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP with SI ..... Respondent Mohd. Faizan Ghani, PS Ghazipur. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. Convicted for offence punishable under Section 307 IPC Din Mohd. @ Dinu challenges the impugned judgment dated 17th March, 2016 and the order on sentence dated 29th March, 2016 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of `10,000/- for offence punishable under Section 307 IPC.2. Assailing the conviction, the Learned Counsel for Din Mohd. @ Dinu submits that the injuries were simple in nature which could not have caused death in ordinary course of nature. Thus the appellant could not have been convicted for offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. It was further submitted that PW-3...
Modtech Projects (India) Private Limited vs.modtech Material Handling ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved On:22. 11.2016 Judgment Pronounced On:19. 12.2016 CO.PET. 619/2016 IN THE MATTER OF:-"MODTECH PROJECTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED .PETITIONER/TRANSFEROR COMPANY AND MODTECH MATERIAL HANDLING PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED ..PETITIONER/TRANSFEREE COMPANY Through: Mr Manoj Kumar Garg and Mr. Prem Mardi, Advocates for petitioner. Ms Aparna Mudiam, Asst. ROC for RD. Ms Ruchi Sindhwani, Advocate for OL. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J1 The present Petition has been filed jointly, under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by Modtech CO.PET. 619/2016 Page 1 of 1 Projects (India) Private Limited (hereinafter referred as Transferor Company) and Modtech Material Handling Projects Private Limited (hereinafter referred as Transferee Company) seeking sanction of the Scheme of Amalgamation (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme) between the Transferor Company and...
Giesecke & Devrient India Private Limited vs.giesecke & Devrient Ms In ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:08.12.2016 Judgment pronounced on:19.12.2016 CO.PET. 654/2016 IN THE MATTER OF:-"GIESECKE & DEVRIENT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Petitioner/Demerged Company AND GIESECKE & DEVRIENT MS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Petitioner/Resulting Company Through: Mr. R. Jawahar Lal and Mr. Sanjeev Jain, Advocates for the... Petitioners. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.1. This joint Petition filed has been filed under Sections 391(1), 393 and 394 read with Sections 100 to 103 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the... Petitioners seeking sanction of this Court to the proposed Scheme of Arrangement and Demerger (hereinafter referred to CO.PET. 654/2016 Page 1 of 1 as the proposed scheme) between Giesecke & Devrient India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Demerged Company) and Giesecke & Devrient MS India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Resulting Company...
Krishan vs.oriental Insurance Company Ltd.& Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:19. h December, 2016 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Through: Mr. Ravi Sabharwal, Advocate ..... Appellant ONIL KUMAR GULATI & ANR Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate for Respondent No.1 ....... RESPONDENTS Versus + MAC.APP. 80/2012 (i) (ii) + MAC.APP. 1080/2012 (iii) + MAC.APP. 1081/2012 ANMOL SETHI & ANR KRISHAN & ANR Versus Versus ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Through: Mr. Ravi Sabharwal, Advocate ..... Appellant Through: Nemo ....... RESPONDENTS ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Through: Mr. Ravi Sabharwal, Advocate ..... Appellant ....... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate for Respondent No.1 MAC.APP.80, 1080 & 1081 of 2012 MAC.APP.381/2013 Page 1 of 6 KRISHAN (iv) + MAC.APP. 381/2013 Versus Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate ..... Appellant ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR. ....... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ravi Sabharwal, Advocate for Respondent No.1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (O ...
Sms Paryavaran Ltd & Ors. Vs.intergen Energy Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2016
* % + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:19. h December, 2016 CRL.M.C. 4724/2016 SMS PARYAVARAN LTD & ORS ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Gagan Chhabra, Ms. Richa Narang, Mr. Mayank Chawla & Mr. Rohit Puri, Advs. versus INTERGEN ENERGY LTD Represented by: CRL.M.C. 4746/2016 SMS PARYAVARAN LTD & ORS. ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Gagan Chhabra, Ms. Richa Narang, Mr. Mayank Chawla & Mr. Rohit Puri, Advs. versus INTERGEN ENERGY LTD. Represented by: CRL.M.C. 4747/2016 SMS PARYAVARAN LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Gagan Chhabra, Ms. Richa Narang, Mr. Mayank Chawla & Mr. Rohit Puri, Advs. versus INTERGEN ENERGY LTD. Represented by: ..... Respondent Page 1 of 8 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. No.19677/2016 in CRL.M.C. 4724/2016. Crl. M.A. No.19734/2016 in CRL.M.C. 4746/2016. Crl. M.A. No.19736/2016 in CRL.M.C. 4747/2016. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptio...
Madhava Hytech-Rani (Jv) vs.ircon International Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + ARB.P. 164/2016 Judgment delivered on:19. 12.2016 MADHAVA HYTECH-RANI (JV) ........ Petitioner Versus IRCON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Dr Amit George, Mr Swaroop George and Ms Rajsree Ajay. : Mr Nandan Kumar and Mr Tushar Chauhan. CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 Madhava Hytech-Rani (JV) (hereafter Madhava) has filed the present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the Act) for appointment of a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes that have arisen between the parties in connection with a contract dated 20.06.2007. The Respondent, (hereafter IRCON International Ltd.2. IRCON), opposes the present petition principally on the ground that an earlier petition filed by Madhava for similar reliefs was dismissed and therefore, one of the persons - who are employees of IRCON - is t...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »