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.
Sh. Mahesh Chandra Joshi vs.gail India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.8150/2016 and C.M. No.45042/2016 (for taking on record additional affidavit) SH. MAHESH CHANDRA JOSHI * + % 5th December, 2016 ........ Petitioner GAIL INDIA LTD. Through: Mr. Barun Kumar Sinha, Advocate with Ms. Pratibha Sinha, Advocate. versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sandeep Prabhakar, Advocate with Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Vikas Mehta, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks directions against his employer/respondent/Gail India Ltd. to quash the inter office memo dated 26.9.2008 as per which the respondent only recognizes an MBA post- graduate course/program, obtained by distance education, if the same is of three years and not of a lesser period.... Petitioner is having an MBA post- graduate degree of two years through distance education. ...
Bhawalpur Co-Operative Group Housing Society vs.hitesh Kumar Madan & O ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2016
$~3. * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA8962016 BHAWALPUR CO-OPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY Through: Mr. B.R. Kaushik, Advocate ..... Appellant versus HITESH KUMAR MADAN & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Prosenjeet Banerjee, Advocate with Ms. Nidhi Parashar and Ms. Anumita Chandra, Advocates for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER0512.2016 CM APPL. 45165/2016 (by the appellant for permission to delete the name of the respondent No.3 from the array of the parties) 1. In view of the orders passed on 18.11.2016, when the appellant was directed to delete the name of the respondent No.3 from the array of the respondents and file an amended memo of parties, no further orders are required to be passed on this application.2. The application is accordingly disposed of. Amended memo of parties enclosed therewith is taken on record. RFA8962016 and CM APPL. 42684-42685/2016 1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant/defendant No.1/Society, who is a...
Shashi Bala & Ors. Vs.manish Mehra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:05. 12.2016 RC.REV. 583/2016, CAV.1027/2016 & CM Nos.44955-56/2016 $~A-54 * % + SHASHI BALA & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through Mr.Sunil Dutt Dixit, Advocate versus Through Mr.Jos Chiramel, Advocate MANISH MEHRA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH ..... Respondent JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) For orders see RC.REV. 575/2016. DECEMBER05 2016/v (JAYANT NATH) JUDGE...
Prabhat Agri Biotech Ltd. And Anr. Vs.registrar of Plant Varieties and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:22. 04.2016 Pronounced on:02. 12.2016 + W.P.(C) 250/2009 PRABHAT AGRI BIOTECH LTD. AND ANR. Petitioners REGISTRAR OF PLANT VARIETIES AND ORS...Respondents Versus + W.P.(C) 7102/2011, C.M. APPL.16215/2011 & 18367/2012 KAVERI SEED COMPANY LTD. REGISTRAR OF PLANT VARIETIES AND ANR....Respondents Petitioner Versus Through: Sh. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Abhishek Saket, Ms. Vijaya Singh and Sh. Manish Madhukar, Advocates, for petitioners. Sh. Pravin Anand with Ms. Geetanjali Viswanathan, Ms. Neeti Wilson and Ms. Asavari Jain, Advocates, for interveners. Sh. Anil Dutt and Sh. Sudershan. S. Sekhawat, Advocates, for Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Co. Ltd. Sh. H.S. Chandhoke and Sh. Shivi Sethi, Advocates, for Respondent No.3 in W.P.(C) 250/2009. Dr. Ashwani Bharadwaj, Advocate, for Respondent No.1 in W.P.(C) 250/2009. Sh. Dev. P. Bhardwaj, CGSC with Ms. Anubha Bhardwaj, Advocate, in W.P.(C) 7102/2011. for UOI, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE...
Inovyn Sverige Ab vs.the Designated Authority, Directorate General of ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
$~27 TO29* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:02. 12.2016 + W.P.(C) 6065/2016 VYNOVA WILHELMSHAVEN GMBH THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI DUMPING AND ALLIED DUTIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner versus + W.P.(C) 7603/2016, C.M. APPL.31288/2016, 31289/2016, 31290/2016 & 31291/2016 INOVYN SVERIGE AB versus THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI-DUMPING AND ALLIED DUTIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner + W.P.(C) 8036/2016, C.M. APPL.33327/2016, 33328/2016, 33359/2016 & 3330/2016 versus INOVYN CHLORVINYLS LTD. THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI DUMPING AND ALLIED DUTIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner Through : Sh. Balbir Singh, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Aashish Gupta, Sh. Aditya Mukherjee and Sh. Angad Sandhu, Advocates, for petitioners, ...
Gyan Chand vs.kamlesh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
$~1 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: December 02, 2016 RSA3462016 GYAN CHAND ..... Appellant Through: Mr.N.K.Aggarwal & Ms.Nupur Sachdeva, Advocates with appellant in person versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Deepak Gupta, Advocate with Mr.Ankush Sharma & Mr.Gaurav Dhakar, Advocates KAMLESH CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI JUDGMENT (Oral) 1. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed against the concurrent judgment of the Courts below i.e. of the First Appellate Court dated 16th September, 2016 and of the trial Court dated 11th December, 2014 whereby the suit of the plaintiff in respect of the possession has been decreed under Order XII Rule 6 CPC.2. After the notice of the appeal was sent to the Respondent, LCR was also requisitioned.3. At the stage of hearing, the thrust of argument on behalf of the appellant was that instead of passing a decree under Order XII Rule 6 CPC on the basis of admission ...
Vynova Belgium Nv (Formerly Known as Vynova Tessenderlo Nv) vs.the Des ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
$~26 TO29* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5907/2016 Decided on:02. 12.2016 VYNOVA BELGIUM NV (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VYNOVA TESSENDERLO NV) THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI-DUMPING AND ALLIED DUTIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS versus ........ Petitioner + W.P.(C) 6065/2016 VYNOVA WILHELMSHAVEN GMBH THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI DUMPING AND ALLIED DUTIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner versus + W.P.(C) 7603/2016, C.M. APPL.31288/2016, 31289/2016, 31290/2016 & 31291/2016 INOVYN SVERIGE AB versus THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI-DUMPING AND ALLIED DUTIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner + W.P.(C) 8036/2016, C.M. APPL.33327/2016, 33328/2016, 33359/2016 & 3330/2016 INOVYN CHLORVINYLS LTD. THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ........ Petitioner versus W.P.(C) 5907/201...
Kaveri Seed Company Ltd. Vs.registrar of Plant Varieties and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:22. 04.2016 Pronounced on:02. 12.2016 + W.P.(C) 7102/2011, C.M. APPL.16215/2011 & 18367/2012 KAVERI SEED COMPANY LTD. REGISTRAR OF PLANT VARIETIES AND ANR....Respondents Petitioner Versus Through: Sh. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Abhishek Saket, Ms. Vijaya Singh and Sh. Manish Madhukar, Advocates, for petitioner. Sh. Pravin Anand with Ms. Geetanjali Viswanathan, Ms. Neeti Wilson and Ms. Asavari Jain, Advocates, for interveners. Sh. Anil Dutt and Sh. Sudershan. S. Sekhawat, Advocates, for Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Co. Ltd. Sh. Dev. P. Bhardwaj, CGSC with Ms. Anubha Bhardwaj, Advocate, in W.P.(C) 7102/2011. for UOI, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % The writ petition is allowed without any order as to costs. For detailed judgment, the decision dated 02.12.2016 in W.P.(C) 250/2009 may be referred to. DECEMBER2 2016 S. RAVINDRA BHAT (JUDGE) R.K. GAUBA (JUDGE)...
Inovyn Chlorvinyls Ltd. Vs.the Designated Authority, Directorate Gener ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
$~27 TO29* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:02. 12.2016 + W.P.(C) 6065/2016 VYNOVA WILHELMSHAVEN GMBH THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI DUMPING AND ALLIED DUTIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner versus + W.P.(C) 7603/2016, C.M. APPL.31288/2016, 31289/2016, 31290/2016 & 31291/2016 INOVYN SVERIGE AB versus THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI-DUMPING AND ALLIED DUTIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner + W.P.(C) 8036/2016, C.M. APPL.33327/2016, 33328/2016, 33359/2016 & 3330/2016 versus INOVYN CHLORVINYLS LTD. THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI DUMPING AND ALLIED DUTIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner Through : Sh. Balbir Singh, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Aashish Gupta, Sh. Aditya Mukherjee and Sh. Angad Sandhu, Advocates, for petitioners, ...
Jotsna @ Jyoti & Anr vs.lakhpat Rai
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
$~ 2 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: December 2, 2016 RSA3522016 & CM No.43607/2016 JOTSNA @ JYOTI & ANR ..... Appellants Through: Mr.Dhan Mohan & Mr.Sarthak Maggon, Advocate. versus Through: None. LAKHPAT RAI CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI JUDGMENT (Oral) ..... Respondent 1. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 read with Order XLII Rule 2 and Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is preferred against the concurrent judgment of the Courts below i.e. of the First Appellate Court dated August 22, 2016 in RCA No.6/2016 and of the Trial Court dated March 01, 2016 in Civil Suit No.4784/2015 (Old No.254/2013), by which the suit of the respondent/plaintiff has been decreed and the appellants were directed to deliver the peaceful vacant possession of the suit property within one month to the respondent/plaintiff.2. The brief facts are that the respondent/plaintiff Lakhpat Rai filed a civil suit seeking the decree of declaration, mandatory an...
- ‹ Prev
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- Next ›
- Last »