Delhi Court February 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.
Narain Singh and Ors vs.s D M / Registrar of Soceities and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2017
$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1399/2017 & CM64212017 1. NARAIN SINGH AND ORS ........ Petitioners Through : Mr. L.K. Garg, Advocate versus S D M / REGISTRAR OF SOCEITIES AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Mr. Shatrajit Banerjee, Advocate for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % The petitioners have filed the present petition praying inter alia for ORDER1702.2017 issuing directions to the respondent No.1/Registrar of Societies to conduct the elections of the respondent No.2/State Bank of India Pensioners Association, by secret ballot for the term commencing from the year 2017.2. Counsel for the respondent No.1, who appears on advance copy, states that the petitioners have an equally alternate efficacious remedy under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (in short the Act) for raising the dispute relating to the respondent No.2/Association before the civil court. He therefore opposes the maintainability of the present petition.3. In view of the prov...
Rajnish @ Sonu vs.the State Govt of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RESERVED ON : FEBRUARY15 2017 DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY17 2017 CRL.A. 1178/2015 RAJNISH @ SONU ..... Appellant Through : Mr.R.K.Gupta, Advocate. versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Arun K.Sharma, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is a judgment dated 11.09.2015 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.188/2013 arising out of FIR No.228/2013 PS Bharat Nagar by which the appellant-Rajnish @ Sonu was held guilty for committing offence punishable under Section 10 POCSO Act. By an order dated 15.09.2015, he was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years with fine Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge- sheet was that on 29.08.2013, at about 03.30 p.m., at House No.A-102, Crl.A.1178/2015 Page 1 of 6 J.J.Colony, Wazi...
Kanav Papers Private Limited vs.star Kraft Papers Private Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved On:05. 12.2016 Judgment Pronounced On:17. 02.2017 CO.PET. 377/2016 KANAV PAPERS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ..Petitioner/Demerged Company STAR KRAFT PAPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ..Petitioner/Resulting Company Through: Mr. Subhiksh Vasudev, Mr. Aman Gupta, Advocates for the... Petitioners. Ms. Aparna Mudiam, Assistant ROC. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.1. The present petition has been filed jointly under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by Kanav Papers Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Demerged Company) and Star Kraft Papers Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Resulting Company), seeking sanction of the scheme of arrangement (hereinafter CO.PET.377/2016 Page 1 of 1 referred to as the Scheme) between the Demerged Company and the Resulting Company.2. The registered offices of each of the... Petitioner Companies are situated at Delhi, wi...
Smt. Saroj Devi vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) Nos.989/2010 & 5196/2010 17th February, 2017 W.P.(C) No.989/2010 + % 1. SMT. SAROJ DEVI GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. C.S.S. Tomar, Advocate. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Niti Jain, Advocate.2. SMT. SAROJ BALA W.P.(C) No.5196/2010 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. C.S.S. Tomar, Advocate. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Niti Jain, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) W.P.(C) No.989/2010 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the relief of being regularized in her employment with the respondent no.2/school and with which school W.P.(C) Nos.989/2010 & 5196/2010 Page 1 of 7 petitioner was working as a part time water woman. The respondent no.2/school is an aided school.2. The facts of the case are that petitioner was appointed ...
Procter & Gamble Home Products Private Limited vs.hindustan Unilever L ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2017
% *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:17. h February, 2017 + CS(OS) No.459/2016 & IA No.11244/2016 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) PROCTER & GAMBLE HOME PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Mr. Sandeep Sethi and Ms. Prathiba M. Singh, Sr. Advs. with Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Mr. Siddhanth Sharma, Ms. Eesha Mohapatra, Ms. Ruby Singh Ahuja, Ms. Akanksha Munjal, Mr. Arvind Chari and Mr. Devanshu Khanna, Advs. Versus HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD. ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Abhinav Vasisht, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sameer Parekh, Mr. D.P. Mohanty, Ms. Rukhmani Bobde, Ms. Nandita Bajpai, Ms. Swati Bhardwaj and Mr. Abhiram Naik, Advs. + CS(OS) No.463/2016 & IA No.11360/2016 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) AND HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sameer Parekh, Mr. D.P. Mohanty, Ms. Rukhmani Bobde, Ms. Nandita Bajpai, Ms. Swati Bhardwaj and Mr. Abhiram Naik, Advs. Versus PROCTER & GAMBLE HOME PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Defenda...
Inderjeet Singh vs.commissioner of Police Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2017
$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1430/2017 INDERJEET SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Tanmay Mehta, Advocate. versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE DELHI AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sanjay Ghose, Mr. Smith, Mr. Rhishab Jetley, Advocates for R-1 & R-5 Mr. Rakesh Mittal, SC for R-2. Ms. Monika Arora, SC for R-3. Mr. G.D. Mishra, SC for R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER1702.2017 1. At the outset, Mr. Ghose, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 and 5 and learned counsel for the respondent No.2, who appears on advance copy, oppose the maintainability of the present petition. Mr. Ghosh states that even on merits, the present petition is not maintainable for the reason that the petitioner has not approached any of the respondents before rushing to the court with his grievance and the complaint received by the respondent No.1 from a third party, vide letter dated 13.2.2017 (Annexure-P-2 (colly) on the very same issue, was duly ...
Narender Singh vs.govt. Of n.c.t. Of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2017
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :13. 02.2017 Judgment delivered on :17. 02.2017 + W.P.(C) 8896/2008 NARENDER SINGH ........ Petitioner Through Ms. Aruna Mehta, Adv. versus GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI ..... Respondent CORAM: Through Ms.Jyoti Taneja, Adv. for GNCTD. Mr. Nalin Tripathi, Adv for SDMC. HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 The petitioner Narender Singh and Nirmal Kaur are the unfortunate parents of master Lakhvinder Singh. On 14.6.2007 Lakhvinder Singh aged 10 years while playing cricket along with other children in B-Block, Tilak Vihar (adjacent to a drain) fell into the drain and succumbed to his death. This drain passes through the area of Tilak Vihar. Children of the locality of Tilak Vihar used to play cricket in the park. This park had no fencing. There was also no cover over the drain and no safety bracket around it. This was well within the knowledge of respondent nos.2 and 3 (PWD and the WP(C) No.8896/2008 Page 1 of...
Sachidanand vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2017
$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1363/2017 SACHIDANAND Date of Decision :17. h February, 2017 ........ Petitioner Through Mr. A.K. Trivedi with Mr. Abhishek Tiwari and Mr. Vaibhav Trivedi,Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Prasanta Varma,Sr. Central Govt. Counsel with Mr. Vijay Goswami, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): By the impugned order dated 22.02.2016 OA No.1508/2016 filed by the petitioner Sachindanand has been dismissed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal.2. This is the second round of litigation as the High Court in W.P. (C) No.8939/2007 vide order dated 27.09.2013 had earlier set aside the first order dated 14.02.2007 passed by the Tribunal with remand for fresh consideration. For the sack of clarity and for appreciation of the controversy, we would like to reproduce this order dated 27.09.2013 which reads as u...
Milind Vasant Bodhankar vs.m/s t.c. Communications Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2017
* % + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:17. h February, 2017 CRL.M.C. 2247/2016 & Crl.M.A. 9452/2016 (stay) ARUNKUMAR SHRIVASTAVA Represented by: Mr. Hrishikesh S. Chitaley, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus M/S T.C.COMMUNICATIONS PVT.LTD. Represented by: Dr. Alok, Adv. CRL.M.C. 2256/2016 & Crl.M.A. 9475/2016 (stay) MILIND VASANT BODHANKAR ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Hrishikesh S. Chitaley, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus M/S T.C. COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Represented by: Dr. Alok, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. Complaint case No.4309/2015 was filed by the respondent M/s. T.C. Communications Pvt. Ltd. (in short T.C.) against Abhijeet Projects Ltd. (in short the accused company) and 9 other persons who were its senior DGM, Senior DM, Managing Directors, authorized signatories etc. under Section CRL.M.C. Nos. 2247/2016 & 2256/2016 Page 1 of 4 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in sho...
M/S Gujral Enterprises Pvt Ltd vs.new Delhi Municipal Council
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-2017
$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1367/2017 & CMs 6221-22/2017 1. M/S GUJRAL ENTERPRISES PVT LTD Through : Mr. Ashok Chhabra, Advocate ........ Petitioner versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Through : Mr. Arjun Mitra, Advocate for NDMC. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER1702.2017 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for setting aside the order dated 6.3.2012 passed by the Assessing Authority for the Assessment Year 2004-05 to 31.3.2010 in respect of the property bearing No.18, Kautilya Marg, Chanakya Puri, New Delhi.2. Counsel for the respondent/NDMC opposes the maintainability of the present petition on the ground that the remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner under Section 115 of the New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 (in short the Act) and the petitioner cannot be permitted to bypass the statutory remedy and approach this Court directly by filing the present petition. He also states th...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »