Delhi Court December 2017 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.
Adesh Kumar Gupta vs.shri d.k. Mishra and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:09. 03.2017 Pronounced on:20. 12.2017 + I.A. 13851/2009 IN EL.PET.20/2009 ADESH KUMAR GUPTA ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. P.D. Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Simran Brar and Ms. Deveshi Mishra, Advocates. versus SHRI D.K. MISHRA AND ANOTHER ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Mr. Arvind Nigam, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajiv Kapur, Mr. Harish Barara, Mr. R.S. Chauhan, Mr. Mikhil Sharda and Mr. Akshay Bhandari, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.Facts 1. Adesh Kumar Gupta, (hereafter referred to as Adesh Gupta) filed an election petition (El. Pet. 20/2009) under Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereafter the Act) challenging the election of Ajay Maken (hereafter the Maken) as a Member of Parliament from the New Delhi Parliamentary Constituency for the Lok Sabha elections of 2009. The... Petitioner alleges that the Second Respondent, along with his election agent, and others...
M/S Rspl Limited vs.m/s m.m Products
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2017
$~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 81/2015 M/S RSPL LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through Mr. D.K. Yadav Advocates. versus M/S M.M PRODUCTS Through ..... Defendant Ex Parte Date of Decision:20. h December, 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (Oral):1. Present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, copyright, passing off, delivery up and rendition of accounts, damages etc. against the defendant. The prayer clause in the suit is reproduced hereinbelow:-""47 That the Plaintiff, therefore, prays:-"(A) For a decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant by themselves as also through their individual partners/proprietors, directors, agents, representatives, distributors, assigns, stockiest etc., and all others acting for and on CS(OS) 81/2015 Page 1 of 11 using, displaying, trademark/ behalf of the Defendant from manufacturing, selling, advertising, importing/exporting or by any other mode or man...
Attro Devi & Ors. Vs.land Acquisition Collector & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2017
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:20. h December, 2017 + W.P.(C) 10075/2015 ATTRO DEVI & ORS. LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR & ORS. versus ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Deepak Rajpal, proxy counsel. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Yeeshu Jain, standing counsel for LAC/L&B with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, adv. Mr.Pawan Mathur, Adv. for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Counter affidavit has been handed over in Court by Mr.Yeeshu Jain. Copy supplied to the counsels for the parties.2. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal.3. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioners. The petitioners seek a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land of the petitiones comprised in Khasra no.1 Etc./5measuring 3 bighas 9 biswas and Khasra No.1 Etc./5measuring 1 bigha 15 biswas situated in t...
Outokumpu Oyj vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) 8717/2017 & CM APPL. Nos. 35723/2017 (Stay) 43275/2017 (Amendment) % Reserved on:7. h December, 2017 Date of Decision:20. h December, 2017 OUTOKUMPU OYJ Through : Mr.P. Chidambaram, Senior ....Petitioner Advocate with Mr.Naresh Thakur, Mr.Sanjay Natoni, Mr.Ashish Prasad, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondents Through : Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr.Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr.Charitarth Bharti, Mr.Yuvraj Sharma, Ms.Tejaswita, Advocate for respondent No1 to 3. Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Mr.Balbir Singh, Sr. Advocates with Mr.Jitendra Singh, Mr.Vaibhav Sharma & Ms.Kartika Sharma, Advocates for respondent Nos.4 & 5. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH SANJIV KHANNA, J.: This order and judgment would decide the issue whether we should exercise our discretion and entertain the present writ petition inspite of the statutory alternative remedy. W.P. (C)8717 /2017 Page 1 of 18 2...
Mrs. Jasmeet Kaur vs.mr. Navtej Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2017
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 70/2017 & I.A. 2068/2017 MRS. JASMEET KAUR ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Malavika Rajkotia, Advocate with Mr. Ramakant Sharma and Ms. Akriti Tyagi, Advocates. versus MR. NAVTEJ SINGH ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Anil Malhotra, Advocate with Mr. Ranjit Malhotra and Mr. Rajat Bhalla, Advocates. % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN Reserved on :01. t December, 2017 Date of Decision :20. h December, 2017 MANMOHAN, J: I.A. 3132/2017 JUDGMENT1 Present application has been filed under Order VII Rule 10 CPC for rejection of the plaint, dismissal and return of the suit. However, at the outset, learned counsel for the defendant confined his prayer for return of the plaint under Order VII Rule 10 CPC.2. Mr. Anil Malhotra, learned counsel for defendant stated that the anti-suit injunction sought by the plaintiff-wife pertained to a suit/proceeding in relation to guardianship and custody/access of two CS(OS) 70/2017 Page 1 of 15 minor children w...
Subodh Kumar vs.union of India and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2017
$~6. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5783/2017 SUBODH KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Shekhar Gahlot, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. G. Tushar Rao with Mr. Mayank Sharma, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI % ORDER2012.2017 1. The petitioner had applied to the respondent No.2/Director General of Recruitment, Indian Army, IHQ, Ministry of Defence, for recruitment to the post of Soldier Clerk on 13.9.2016. Upon successfully clearing the physical test on 16.11.2016, he was found medically unfit during his medical examination held on 17.11.2016, on three grounds namely, Knock Knee, Flat Feet and Tongue Tie.2. The petitioner then requested for a Review Medical Board, which prayer was acceded to. During his review medical conducted at the Military Hospital, Agra on 13.12.2016, the petitioner was cleared on two counts i.e., Flat Feet and Knock Knee. It is the version of the petition...
Maan Singh & Ors. Vs.govt of Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2017
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:20. h December, 2017 + W.P. (C.) No.5443/2017 MAAN SINGH & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Lalit Kumar Rawal and Mr. Sunil K. Goel, Advocates versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for L&B/LAC. Mr. Sanjeev Sagar and Ms. Meetu Singh, Advocates for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Counter affidavit has been handed over in Court by the LAC. The same is taken on record.2. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal.3. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioners. The petitioners seek a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land of the petitioners comprised in Khasra no.27Min, i.e., total area (0-15) having 1/2th share, i.e. 375 ...
j.c. Bamford Excavators Limited & Anr. Vs.bull Machines Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:20. 12.2017 + CS(OS) 2934/2011 J.C. BAMFORD EXCAVATORS LIMITED & ANR. .....Plaintiffs Versus BULL MACHINES PVT. LTD. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Plaintiffs ..... Defendant : : Mr P. Chidambaram, Senior Advocate with Mr Pravin Anand, Ms Vaishali Mittal and Ms Geetanjali Visvanathan. Mr A.N. Haksar, Senior Advocate with Mr Udayan Jain, Ms Anju Thomas and Mr Kamal Sharma. For the Defendant CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J IA Nos. 1733/2015 & 1732/2015 1. The defendant (hereafter BMPL) has filed the afore-captioned applications under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC (IA No.1732/2015) and under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC (IA No.1733/2015). By way of IA No.1732/2015, BMPL prays that suit be dismissed with exemplary costs and in IA No.1733/2015, BMPL seeks the following relief:-"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may most graciously be pleased to pass a judg...
Interglobe Aviation Limited & Anr. Vs.union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2017
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on : December 04, 2017 Judgment pronounced on: December 20th , 2017 + WP(C) 9820/2017 INTERGLOBE AVIATION LIMITED & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Gaurav Sarin, Ms. Charul Sarin & Mr.Abhishek Manchanda Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Ms. Anjana Gosain and Ms. Rabiya Thakur, Advs. for R-1. Mr. Harish N. Salve, Mr. Rajiv Nayar and Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Sr. Advs. with Ms. Anuradha Dutt, Ms.Vijayalakshmi Menon, Mr. Anish Kapur, Mr. Saket Sikri and Mr. Anirudh Bakhru, Advs. for R-2. Mr. Digvijay Rai and Mr. Pulkit Tyagi, Advs. for R-3. Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sourabh Mishra, Advocate for R-5. Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajshekhar Page 1 of 26 WP(C) 9820/2017 Rao, Ms.Meghna Mishra and Mr. Ankit Rajgariha, Advocates for R-6. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA JUDGMENT A.K. CHAWLA, J.... Petitioner no.1, a provider of Schedu...
Intec India Limited vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2017
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:20. 12.2017 LPA8042017 & CM Nos.46598-46600/2017 INTEC INDIA LIMITED ..... Appellant Through: Dr. Amit George with Mr. Prashant Sharma, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Shubhra Parashar, Adv. for R-1/UOI. Mr. Arun Kumar, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. CHAWLA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(ORAL) 1. Complaining of arbitrariness, the appellant had sought the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution in respect of the detention/demurrage charges for two months (from 14.08.2016 to 15.10.2016) claimed by the respondent (hereafter CONCOR) to the extent of `6,04,686/-. The appellants contention was that the materials on the record produced before the Single Judge revealed that CONCOR was beneficiary as lessee of public lands for which it paid an extremely subsidised fee. The learned Single Judge rejected the plea of arbitrariness and held that the dete...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »