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.
The National Insurance Co Ltd. Vs.savitri Devi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:23. d May, 2017 MAC.APP. 378/2017 & CM No.14657/2017 THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. Through: Mr. S.P. Jain and Mr.Himanshu Gambhir, Advocates. ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, Advocate for... RESPONDENTS. Pavitra Mohan Sharma and Mr. Arun Kumar Sharma, Advocates for... RESPONDENTS No.5 and 6. MAC.APP. 379/2017 & CM No.14659/2017 THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.P. Jain and Mr.Himanshu Gambhir, Advocates. Versus SAVITRI DEVI & ORS. $~19 & 20 * % + + CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI JAVITRI DEVI & ORS. Versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, Advocate for... RESPONDENTS. Pavitra Mohan Sharma and Mr. Arun Kumar Sharma, Advocates for... RESPONDENTS No.5 and 6. MAC.APP.Nos.378 & 379/ 2017 Page 1 of 6 NAJMI WAZIRI, J (Oral) 1. These appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 impugn the common Award dated 19.01.2017 passed in MACP No.and ...
Innovative Cargo Services Through: Partner Shri Binod Kumar vs.commiss ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~ * 12 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CUSAA202017 INNOVATIVE CARGO SERVICES THROUGH: PARTNER SHRI BINOD KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Prem Ranjan Kumar with Ms. Vidushi Shubham, Advocates. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (GENERAL) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Narula, Senior standing counsel with Mr. Abhishek Ghai, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VINOD GOEL % ORDER2305.2017 S. Muralidhar, J.:1. This appeal by M/s. Innovative Cargo Services, under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 (Act) is directed against the impugned order dated 30th March 2017 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in C/A/52636/2017-CU(DB).2. Admit.3. The following question of law is framed for consideration: (i) Was the CESTAT is justified in directing the concerned Authority to issue a show cause notice (SCN) within 15 days for complete the CUSAA202017 Page 1 of 6 proceeding within the prescribed time of three months, notwithstanding the Cu...
Ferrero Spa & Anr. Vs.shri Maa Distribution (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:19. 05.2017 Judgment delivered on:23. 05.2017 CS(OS) 1763/2010 FERRERO SPA & ANR. Plaintiffs Through: Ms. D. Neha Reddy, Ms. Mrinali Menon, Advocates. Versus SHRI MAA DISTRIBUTION (INDIA) PVT. LTD. & ANR Defendants Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademarks/trade dress, passing off, dilution of well-known trademark, delivery up and damages.2. The Plaintiff No.1, Ferrero SpA is a company incorporated under the laws of Italy and Plaintiff No.2, Ferrero India Private Limited is the Indian subsidiary of Ferrero International which along with Ferrero SpA belongs to the Ferrero Group. The Plaintiff No.1 is one of the 4 biggest confectionary CS (OS) 1763/2010 Page 1 of 6 producers worldwide and employs more than 22,000 people. The plaintiffs are the propr...
Anuj Malhotra vs.sanjay Malhotra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: May 23, 2017 + CM(M) No.860/2015 ANUJ MALHOTRA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Kunal Madan and Mr.Aman Anand, Advocates. versus Through: Mr.Rahul Bhagat, Advocate. ..... Respondent SANJAY MALHOTRA CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI JUDGMENT (Oral) CM(M) 860/2015 1. The petitioner Anuj Malhotra, who is plaintiff is Civil Suit No.34/2009, has filed the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 26th May, 2015 whereby the learned Trial Court has allowed the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC and set aside the exparte judgment and decree dated 30th July, 2011.2. The parties to this litigation are closely related. The petitioner Anuj Malhotra is nephew of respondent Sanjay Malhotra. Sh.Deepak Malhotra is father of the petitioner Anuj Malhotra and brother of respondent/defendant Sanjay Malhotra.3. The above description of the parties has been necessitated in view of the ...
Union of India vs.shyam Ji Pandey & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~24 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:23rd May, 2017 FAO1052017 and CM Appln.8204/2017 UNION OF INDIA ...... Appellant Through: Mr. Himanshu Kaushik, for Ms. Rashmi Advocate Malhotra, Panel Counsel for Railways versus SHYAM JI PANDEY & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate for respondents no.1 and 2 along with respondents no.1 and 2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant has challenged the impugned judgment dated 12th September, 2016 whereby the Railway Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.4 lakh along with interest @ 9% per annum to the respondents.2. On 16th August, 2014, Balram boarded train No.14625 from Shakur Basti. Balram fell down near Sampla Railway Station which resulted in fatal injuries. The respondents are parents of Balram and they filed an application for compensation before the Railway Claims Tribunal. FAO1052017 Page 1 of 11 3. Learned counsel for the appellant urged a...
Khushbu Kaushik (Minor) Thr. Her Father Lt. Col. Rajesh Chandra Kaushi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) 1672/2017 Judgment reserved on :19. h May, 2017 Date of Judgment :23. d May, 2017 KHUSHBU KAUSHIK (MINOR) THR. HER FATHER LT. COL. RAJESH CHANDRA KAUSHIK ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Adv. versus CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. for R-1, 2 & 3. Mr. Shubham Singh, Adv. for Mr. Romy Chacko, Adv. for R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition, inter alia, seeks correction/rectification of the name of her father in the Secondary School Examination (Class X) Grade Sheet cum Certificate of W.P.(c) 1672/2017 Page 1 of 12 Performance issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE).2. The petitioner Khushbu Kaushik is a student studying in Class XII enrolled with the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE). She ...
Union of India and Ors. Vs.sh. Abhay Manglik
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:23. 05.2017 + W.P.(C) 4472/2017 and CM Nos. 19496/2017 and 19497/2017 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Rahul Sharma, Sr. Panel Counsel with Mr. C.K. Bhatt, Adv. versus SH. ABHAY MANGLIK ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. O.P. Kalshian, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA (ORAL) 1. Vide the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal) dated 21.10.2016 in OA No.437/2012 filed by the respondent.2. The respondent/Charged Officer (hereinafter referred to as the CO) had filed the above-said OA challenging the major penalty imposed upon him vide Disciplinary Authority order dated 23.03.2011. He challenged the order of the Disciplinary Authority (hereinafter referred to as the DA) before the Revisioning Authority (hereinafter referred to as the RA) and his challeng...
Court on Its Own Motion vs.raj Kishore & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment:23. d May, 2017 CONT. CAS. (CRL.) No.7/2013 COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION ........ Petitioner Through Ms.Maninder Acharya, Sr.Adv. (Amicus Curiae) with Mr.Sahil Sood, Adv. versus RAJ KISHORE & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Sandeep Kumar, Adv. for Raj Kishore and Nand Kishore. Ms.Shobhana Takiar, Adv. for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. A criminal contempt was registered pursuant to observations made by the learned Single Judge of this Court while deciding RFA No.579/2010 on 09.07.2013.2. The appellants (respondents herein) had filed an appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, impugning the judgment and decree dated 04.06.2010. The appellants (plaintiffs in Suit No.78/06/97) had filed the suit for permanent injunction to restrain the Delhi CONT. CAS. (CRL.) No.7/2013 Page 1 of 7 Development Authority and o...
M/S Roots Corporation Limited vs.north Delhi Municipal Corporation & O ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
$~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order:23. d May, 2017 + W.P.(C) 11352/2016 & CM Nos.44519/2016, 44521/2016, 4225/2017, 19133/2017 M/S ROOTS CORPORATION LIMITED Through: Mr.Vikas Dhawan, ........ Petitioner Mr.Satyabrata Panda & Mr.Sambit Nanda, Advocates Versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORORATION & ORS. Through: Ms.Madhu Tewatia, ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Adhirath Singh & Mr.Sachin Saini, Advocates for Respondent No.1 Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh, Advocate for Respondent No.2 Mr.Rajat Malhotra, Advocate for Respondent No.3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % Impugned order of 23rd November, 2016 in proceedings under the ORDER ORAL Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the W.P.(C) 11352/2016 Page 1 DMC Act, 1957) is an assessment order against which statutory appeal lies to Municipal Taxation Tribunal by virtue of Section 169 of the DMC Act, 1957. The first respondent-North Delhi Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the North DM...
Lal Bhahadur Singh and Ors vs.punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~22 * + W.P.(C) 4400/2017 & CM APPL.19206-19207/2017 LAL BHAHADUR SINGH & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Arvind Sah with Dr. Kumar Jwala & Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Mishra, Advocates with petitioner No.1 in person. versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Hashmat Nabi, Advocate with Mr. C.S. Gupta, Chief Manager for respondent/PNB. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL ORDER2305.2017 This order is in continuation of order dated 19.05.2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner No.1 states that the petitioners have % 1.2. been able to arrange a sum of Rs.20 lacs and have deposited the same with the respondent/Bank, as undertaken on last date of hearing.3. Mr. Hashmat Nabi, learned counsel for the respondent/Bank states that the cheque that was handed over by the petitioners to the respondent/Bank was for a sum of Rs.1 crore, had bounced and even as on date, a sum of Rs.80 lacs is liable to be...
- ‹ Prev
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- Next ›
- Last »