Delhi Court May 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.
M/S Ht Media Ltd & Anr vs. Navneet Chaturvedi & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2017
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:15. h May, 2017 Pronounced on:26. h May, 2017 CS(OS) 1883/2014 & CCP (O) No.7/2015 M/S HT MEDIA LTD & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through : Ms.Sneha Jain & Mr.Ranjeet Singh, Advocates. versus NAVNEET CHATURVEDI & ANR ..... Defendants Through : None being ex-parte. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This a suit for permanent injunction, infringement of trademark, passing off, rendition of accounts and damages filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants.2. The case of the plaintiffs is that they are one of the leading media houses in India engaged in print media, radio, internet etc. The plaintiffs claims to be the parent entity with its business extending in various dimensions, but per instant suit, they principally are engaged in the publication business of newspapers HINDUSTAN TIMES. It is the case of the plaintiff that their newspaper is pioneer in the business with its editorial excellence and integri...
Praveen Srivastava & Ors. Vs.union Public Service Commission & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.6205/2014 Reserved on :13. h February, 2017 Date of decision:26. h May, 2017 PRAVEEN SRIVASTAVA & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. V.K. Garg, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ajay Jain, Ms. Noopur Dubey and Ms. Astha .Chopra, Advocates. Versus UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS....Respondents Through: Mr. Naresh Kaushik and Mr. Joymoti Mize, Advocates for UPSC/ respondent no.1, Mr. Maninder Singh, Additional Solicitor General, Mr. Kirtiman Singh, Central Government Standing Counsel, Mr. Waize Ali Noor, Mr. Prateek Dhanda and Mr. Pranav Agarwal, Advocates for respondents Nos.2 and 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.1. There is a plethora of case law relating to seniority disputes between direct recruits and promotees. The present litigation exposits another facet of conflict relating to the stage of induction, i.e., the appointment of direct recruits and pro...
Rajesh Babu vs.ministry of Information & Broadcasting & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2017
$~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 2295/2014 RAJESH BABU Reserved on:17. h January, 2017 Date of Decision:26. h May, 2017 Through: Mr. Apurb Lal, Advocate .....Petitioner Versus MINISTRY OF INFROMATION & BROADCASTING & ORS. Through: Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, .....Respondents Rajeev Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. Ms. Radhalakshmi R. & Mr. Pratishth Kaushal, Advocates for respondent Nos. 2 & 3 Sharma, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR CHANDER SHEKHAR, J.Rajesh Babu, the petitioner, impugns the order dated 26th March, 2014 whereby the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) has dismissed OA No.1851/2013 and MA No.3405/2013 as premature. The impugned order also observed that the petitioner would have liberty to raise all contentions during the course of the ongoing departmental proceedings. W.P. (C) No.2295/2014 Page 1 of 16 2. The petitioner was recruited by the Union Public Service Comm...
Woeser Lhamo vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2017
$~50 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:26. 05.2017 + W.P.(C) 4723/2017 WOESER LHAMO versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS For the... Petitioner : Mr. Kulvinder Singh with Mr. L. Ojha, Advocates. For the Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Gogna, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2605.2017 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner, by the present petition, seeks a direction to the respondents to issue her an Indian passport by treating her as an Indian citizen in terms of Section 3(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act, 1955.2. The petitioner was born in India on 01.11.1983. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of this Court dated 13.04.2017 in WP(C) 254/2017 titled Tenzin Passang vs. Union of India & Ors. and other connected matters.3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the WP(C) 4723/2017 Page 1 of 2 application of th...
Sandeep Singh Bhatia vs.state & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:4. h May, 2017 Pronounced on:26. h May, 2017 + W.P.(CRL) 1762/2013 SANDEEP SINGH BHATIA ........ Petitioner STATE & ORS Through: Mr. Rajat Wadhwa, Advocate with Mr. Himanshu Nailwal & Mr. Karan Preet Singh, Advocates versus Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, Additional Standing Counsel for the State. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA1 ORDER This petition invoking the writ jurisdiction of this court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), impleading the State (NCT of Delhi), Commissioner of Police, Delhi, Inspector Sajjan Singh Yadav, as first, second and third respondents respectively, besides adding unknown associates of the aforesaid accused persons as the fourth respondent, was filed by Sandeep Singh Bhatia son of Gurbachan Singh Bhatia R/o D-45, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110027 in October, 2013 seeking the following reli...
Sher Singh & Ors vs.sumer Singh & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2017
$~65 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: May 26, 2017 CM(M) No.602/2017 SHER SINGH & ORS versus Through: Ms.Geeta Mehrotra, Advocate ........ Petitioners Through: None SUMER SINGH & ORS CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI JUDGMENT (Oral) ........ RESPONDENTS CM No.20387/2017 For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 75 days in re-filing of the petition is condoned. The application stands disposed of. CM No.20386/2017 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. CM No.20385/2017 1. This is an application filed on behalf of the petitioners seeking permission to amend memo of parties.2. The prayer is allowed. Amended memo of parties filed along with the application is taken on record.3. The application stands disposed of. CM(M) 602/2017 1. The petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated CM(M) No.602/2017 Page 1 of 7 25th Octob...
Yumnam Marjit Singh vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2017
+ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 1988/2017 Date of Hearing & Order: May 26th, 2017 YUMNAM MARJIT SINGH ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Zainul Abi Deen, Adv. STATE & ANR versus ..... Respondent Through Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP with SI Manoj Kumar, PS I.P. Estate. Respondent no.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.(Oral) The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by 1. the petitioner, namely, Sh. Yumnam Marjit Singh for quashing of FIR No.621/2015, under Section 354D/341/506/509 IPC registered at Police Station IP Estate, Delhi on the basis of a settlement between the petitioner and respondent No.2 namely, Smt. Okram Birbala Devi.2. respondent-State submitted that the respondent present in the Court has been identified to be the complainant in the FIR in question.3. the complainant/respondent no2 knew the petitioner since school days and used to meet with him and was in a relationship with him, though they used to have some quar...
Simhapuri Engery Limited vs.central Electricity Regulatory Commission ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2017
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on :26. 05.2017 + W.P.(C) 4409/2017 SIMHAPURI ENGERY LIMITED CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ANR versus ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : : Mr. Rajshakher Rao, Mr. M. Mishra, Ms. Shikha and Mr. Nishant Singh, Advs. Mr. Nikhil Nayyar and Mr. N. Sai Vinod, Advs. for R-1 Mr. Suparna Srivastava, Adv. for R-2 CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2205.2017 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) CM No.19254/2017 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 4409/2017 & CM No.19253/2017 & 19255/2017 1. Learned counsel for the respondents submit that the petition of the petitioner, which is stated to have been filed on 18.05.2017, was WP(C) 4409/2017 Page 1 of 3 not taken up for consideration, as the petitioner has not filed the hard copy of the said petition.2. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 Commission s...
Neeta Amar vs.vipul Amar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~17 * + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 178/2016 NEETA AMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Navin Sharma and Mr. K. C. Jain, Advocates. VIPUL AMAR versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Geeta Luthra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jai Bansal, Mr. Anshul Duggal, Mr.Sudhir Kumar and Mr. Tribikram Meelee, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL ORDER2605.2017 % CM APPL. No.20637/2017 (Extension of time) 1. This application has been filed by the respondent/husband praying inter alia for extension of time for depositing the arrears of maintenance payable w.e.f. September, 2016 to April, 2017, as ordered on 02.05.2017.2. Vide order dated 02.05.2017, the respondent was directed to deposit the entire arrears of maintenance in the account of the appellant w.e.f. September, 2016 till April, 2017 within four weeks and further, he was directed to continue paying maintenance @ Rs.35,000 p.m. to the appellant effective from the month o...
Hanuman Saran vs.uoi & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:26. h May, 2017 % + W.P.(C) 4376/2015 HANUMAN SARAN UOI & ANR. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr.Satyawrat Sharma & Mr.Yatinder For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr.Ruchir Mishra & Mr.Mukesh Kr.Tiwari, versus ........ RESPONDENTS ....... Petitioner Sharma, Advs. Advs. along with Mr.S.S. Sejwal, Law Officer, CRPF. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HONBLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT C. HARI SHANKAR, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration, in the present writ petition, is whether the decision, of the Commandant 37 Battalion Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), to treat the period, between 02.02.1991 to 17.03.2012, during which the petitioner remained absent from service, as non duty, is legally sustainable or not.2. A brief reference to the relevant facts would be apposite. The petitioner- Hanuman Saran-resident of Village Rithala, was employed W.P.(C) 4376/2015 Page 1 of 19...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »