Delhi Court August 2016 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds - plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
M/s. Stellar Information Technology Private Ltd Vs. Rakesh Kumar and O ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2016
Vibhu Bakhru, J. IA No.5576/2016 1. The Plaintiff has filed the present application, inter alia, praying as under:- "a) Pass an ex-parte ad interim injunction order thereby restraining the defendant, his agent, servants, or any other person on behalf of defendants from using and utilizing the Confidential Information of the plaintiff company and from carrying out any activity including competitive activity in breach of the Confidentiality and Invention Assignment Agreement and Employee Confidentiality Agreement and from approaching the clients, customers and employees of the plaintiff company and further restrain them from bad-mouthing and indulging in vilification campaign against the plaintiff company and thereby cause harm to the reputation and goodwill of the plaintiff company; b) Pass an ex-parte ad interim injunction order thereby directing the defendant no. 4 to render accounts before this Hon'ble Court;" 2. The Plaintiff is a private company and is, inter alia, engaged in the b...
Kembiotic Labouratories and Others Vs. Rana Inderjit Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2016
Pradeep Nandrajog, J. 1. Rana Inderjit Singh, the respondent sued the appellant No.1 : Kembiotic Laboratory and its three partners : appellants No.2 to 4 as partners thereof on the plea that in the year 2001 appellants No.2 to 4 offered to him to collaborate with their business on 50% shareholding basis and desired him to advance to them loan in sum of Rs.53.5 lacs and therefore in Hong Kong he gave US$ 1,13,829.78 to appellant No.2, who promised that on returning to India he will complete the necessary formalities regarding collaboration and till then the money received would be treated as on loan with the partnership firm. As per him he received no further communication from the partners of the firm and he came to India in November, 2002 when, from the account of the partnership firm maintained with State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur Branch, Kirti Nagar and State Bank of Mysore Branch Punjabi Bagh, 11 cheques totaling Rs.53.5 lacs were issued in his name, details whereof are as under:-...
Anil Kumar Sharma Vs. Manju Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2016
Pratibha Rani, J. 1. The appellant/husband Anil Kumar Sharma is aggrieved by the order dated February 04, 2014 whereby his petition seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion has been dismissed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Rohini. 2. The marriage between the appellant/husband and the respondent/wife was solemnized on April 26, 1999 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies at Delhi. The marriage was consummated. The parties were blessed with a daughter on February 25, 2000 who was nine years old at the time of filing the divorce petition. 3. The act of cruelty alleged against the respondent/wife are as under: (i) Her stubborn and non-cooperative nature. (ii) Humiliation to the appellant/husband and his parents due to her disrespectful conduct. (iii) Frequent visits to her parental house and using filthy language against the appellant/husband and his family whenever they requested her to stay at the matrimonial home. (iv) Long stay by respondent/wife at her pa...
Sage Publications Ltd. U.K. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (IT) ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2016
1. The assessee/petitioner is aggrieved by the rejection of its application under Section 245R(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter "the Act"] on the ground that the questions for which reference was made, are part of a pending proceeding. 2. The facts to the extent they are necessary are that the petitioner, a Non-Resident Corporation had filed its return for AY 2012-13. It applied for an advance ruling under Section 245R of the Act, to the Advance Ruling Authority [hereafter "the Ruling Authority"], on 21.11.2013. When the application came up for consideration, the Ruling Authority rejected it citing the reason that the issue was "pending" - thereby invoking proviso to Article 245R(2). The Ruling Authority's order is as follows: "PROCEEDINGS There is a request for adjournment on the ground of unavailability of the counsel. However, the Department takes an objection to this request and points out that in this matter there is already a notice issued under Section 143(2) on 13th of...
Virender Singh Rathee and Others Vs. State (Government of NCT of Delhi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2016
P.S. Teji, J. 1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Sh. Virender Singh Rathee, Sh. Karan Singh Rathee, Smt. Santra Devi and Smt. Ranu Singh through SPA Mr. Kapil Kumar for quashing of FIR No.28/2012 dated 06.02.2012, under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Sagarpur on the basis of the mediation report of the Mediation Centre, Dwarka in view of the settlement arrived at between petitioners and respondent no.2, namely, Ms. Jyoti on 08.04.2015. 2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for 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. 3. The factual matrix of the present case is that the marriage was solemnized between the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 on 05.02.2007 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The husband and in-laws of the complainant used to harass her for dowry. On 28.05....
Times Publishing House Ltd Vs. Financial Times Ltd and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2016
Pradeep Nandrajog, J. (Oral) 1. FAO (OS) No.717/2010 lays a challenge to the order dated December 15, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the appellant s application under Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 seeking stay of the CS (OS) No.2055/2001 filed by the respondent pending adjudication before the IPAB of rectification proceedings pertaining to the trademark FT obtained by the respondent. FAO (OS) No.499/2011 challenges the order dated May 25, 2011 passed by the learned Single judge declining to settle the issue regarding invalidity of the trademark FT of the respondent. 2. The respondent filed CS (OS) No.2055/2001 claiming to be the registered proprietor abroad as well as in India to the letter mark FT alleging violation thereof by the appellant. 3. The plaint was instituted in the year 2001. In the written statement filed the appellant inter-alia pleaded that it was not using FT as its trademark. It pleaded that the respondent s trademark FT was not distinct...
Ganges Concast Industries Limited and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2016
1. This petition has been filed under Sections 391(2) and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 by the petitioner/transferee company seeking sanction of the Scheme of Amalgamation of Ganges Concast Industries Limited (hereinafter referred to as the transferor company) with Salasar Stainless Limited (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner/transferee company). 2. The registered office of the petitioner/transferee company is situated at New Delhi, within the jurisdiction of this Court. However, the registered office of the transferor company is situated at Uttar Pradesh, outside the jurisdiction of this court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a separate petition has been filed by the transferor company in the court of competent jurisdiction seeking sanction of the Scheme of Amalgamation in respect of the transferor company. 3. The petitioner/transferee company was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on 9 th April, 2010 with the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi ...
Paras Ram and Another Vs. Rajinder Kumar and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2016
Judgment (Oral) 1. In the restitution proceedings, trial court vide order of 3rd February, 2014 (Annexure P-5) has allowed the application under Section 144 CPC thereby directing appellants-plaintiffs to restore the possession of the suit property as per the site plan annexed with the plaint. Undisputedly, the suit property is measuring around 7X6 sq. ft., which is a shop on the ground floor in the suit property. 2. The First Appellate Court vide impugned order of 11th July, 2016 (Annexure P-1) upholds the trial court s order by observing as under:- 14. Admittedly, appellant/JD came into the possession of the said portion on the ground floor of the property pursuant to the ex-parte decree passed by the Ld. Civil Judge. Appellants had no independent possession of the roof of the said portion of the property nor any independent possessory right or interest was claimed. The suit property consisted of one room without there being any constructed portion on it. It is also an admitted fact t...
Anil Kumar Bhadoria Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-26-2016
Vipin Sanghi, J. 1. The applicant has preferred the present bail application u/s 438 CrPC apprehending arrest in case FIR No.229/2015 registered at PS Parliament Street u/s 419/420/120B IPC. A similar bail application moved by the applicant before the learned ASJ, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi has been dismissed on 13.06.2016. 2. The aforesaid case arises on the complaint of the complainant Ms. Indu Shukla. The case of the complainant is that in the month of October 2012, Anil Kumar Bhadoria the applicant/ accused known to the family of the complainant, came to her along with one K.K. Sharma also coaccused. The said persons induced and allured the complainant that the wife of K.K. Sharma, namely, Tanisha Rani Sharma also an accused, is the daughter of a Minister of Uttarakhand and belongs to a royal family having good links with various ministers. The complainant was allured that if she arranges Rs.1 crore, she would be made a Director in the Food Corporation of India (FCI). She was ...
Rohit @ Mona Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-24-2016
R.K. Gauba, J. 1. The appellant stands convicted, as charged, by judgment dated 21st March, 2016 of Court of Sessions for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 324 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) upholding the prosecution case that at about 6:15 p.m. on 20th August, 2011 on the terrace above Flat No.C-27/28, Kingsway Camp, Delhi within the jurisdiction of Police Station Mukherjee Nagar, he committed the murder of Rajvinder Kaur (the deceased) by intentionally inflicting multiple stab wounds and also having voluntarily caused hurt to Nisha (PW-2) by stabbing her with a sharp cutting instrument (knife). By order on sentence passed by the learned trial judge on 31st March, 2016, sentence of imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded for offence under Section 302 IPC besides rigorous imprisonment for six months with fine of Rs.15,000/- for offenceunder Section 324 IPC. By the appeal at hand, the appellant (convict) seeks to assail both the judgment and the order on ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »