Delhi Court October 2018 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.
Parveen Kumar vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:31. 10.2018 BAIL APPLN. 2509/2018 PARVEEN KUMAR STATE versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Dev Tyagi and Mr. Ritesh Kain, Advs. For the Respondent : Mr. Hirein Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with ASI Shajudeen CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT3110.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks regular bail in case FIR No.343/2018 under Sections 323/341/380/5of the IPC, Police Station New Ashok Nagar, New Delhi. Subsequently, Section 308 Indian Penal Code, 1860 has been added.2. The allegations against the petitioner in the FIR are that the complainant had a dispute with his wife. During quarrel, wife of the complainant called her mother and brother. They came to the house of the complainant and started beating the complainant with stick, on account of which he sustained injuries. BAIL APPLN. 2509/2018 Page 1 of...
Disposafe Health and Life Care Ltd & Anr. Vs.rajiv Nath & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:15. h October, 2018 Pronounced on:31. t October, 2018 + CS(COMM) 139/2016 & CRL.M.A.9537/2017 IA No.2618/2016, 8591/2016 DISPOSAFE HEALTH AND LIFE CARE LTD & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr.Hemant Dawani, Advocate. RAJIV NATH & ANR. versus ..... Defendants Through: Mr.Peeyoosh Kalra, Mr.Udayvir Rana & Ms.V.Mohini, Advocates. + CS(COMM) 1494/2016, IA No.13849/2016 HINDUSTAN SYRINGES & MEDICAL DEVICES LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr.Peeyoosh Kalra, Mr.Udayvir Rana & Ms.V.Mohini, Advocates versus DISPOSAFE HEALTH AND LIFE CARE LIMITED & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr.Hemant Dawani, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. Since the above suits are cross cases filed by the parties against each other and the injunctions applications under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC in both suits as well as application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CS(COMM) Nos.139/2016 and 1494/2016 Page 1 of 15 CPC in CS (COMM) No.13...
Tina Gupta vs.vishal Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI MAT APP. 93/2007 Judgment reserved on :26. h October, 2018 Date of decision : October, 31st, 2018 TINA GUPTA ..... Appellant Through Mr. Laltaksh Joshi, Adv. versus VISHAL GUPTA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S. Mukerjee, Adv. with Mr. Yogendra Kumar, Adv. for LR of respondent. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT ANU MALHOTRA, J.1. The appellant i.e. Tina Gupta vide the present appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 as amended has assailed the impugned judgment and decree dated 06.10.2007 of the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi in HMA No.801/06, whereby the marriage between the appellant and the respondent to the said divorce petition HMA No.8also arrayed as the respondent to the present appeal (since deceased) and who is now represented by his father was dissolved by a decree of divorce through mutual consent, it having been observed by the learned Trial Court that both the petitioners of the said petition i.e...
M/S Brijwasi Infratech Pvt Ltd vs.vikas Jain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~12 * + VIKAS JAIN versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:31. t October, 2018 M/S BRIJWASI INFRATECH PVT LTD CS(OS) 3171/2014 ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Shalini Kapoor, Mr. Dikshant Khanna & Ms. Bindita Chaturvedi, Advocates (M-9810160155). Through: Mr. Chandra Shekhar & Mr. Prashant (M- Advocates Shekhar, 9999709498). ..... Defendant CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) Learned counsel for the Defendant wishes to withdraw the present I.A. 11482/2016 1. application. The same is dismissed as withdrawn. I.A. 11528/2018 2. The present application has been filed by the Defendant under Section 4 of the Partition Act seeking a right of pre-emption. The prayer sought in the application is as under: a. It is prayed that the hon'ble court to allow me the opportunity to purchase the undivided share as per the law. b. Any other relief as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 3. The brief b...
Bombay Rayon Fashions Ltd & Ors vs.advance Magazine Publishers Inc
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~125 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:31. 10.2018 CM (M) No.1334/2018 BOMBAY RAYON FASHIONS LTD & ORS........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Hemant Singh, Advocate with Ms.Mamta Jha and Mr.Ankit Arvind, Advocates. versus ADVANCE MAGAZINE PUBLISHERS INC....Respondents Through: Mr.B.B. Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Ms.Anuradha Salhotra, Mr.Sumit Wadhwa, Ms.Mallika Ahluwalia and Mr.Uday Khanna, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL VINOD GOEL, J.(ORAL) CM No.45875/2018 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM(M) 1334/2018 & CM No.45874/2018 (for stay) 1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/defendant has impugned the order dated 08.10.2018 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge-05, South- East District, Saket Court, New Delhi (ADJ), while disposing of an application under Section 137 read with Section 138 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA) read with Section 151 of the Code of ...
Vikas Chaudhary vs.state (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:1. t October 2018 Decided on:31. t October 2018 + CRL.A. 218/2018 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 311/2018 JOGINDER @ MINTU ...Appellant Through: Mr. Hans Raj Singh, Advocate THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ....Respondent Through: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP with SI versus Bhagat Singh, PS Ashok Vihar. Mr. Rajiv Mohan, Mr. Abhimanyu Kampani, Mr. Abhishek Shrivastava, Ms. Priyanka Singh, Mr. Ankur Rai, Mr. M.A. Karthik, Mr. Yuvraj Nain & Mr. Manish Phogat, Advocates for the Complainant. + CRL.A. 319/2018 & CRL.M.(B) 446/2018 VIKAS CHAUDHARY ...Appellant Through: Mr. Ajay Burman, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajesh Harnal, Ms. Tanya Harnal, Mr. Sahil Verma and Ms. Sadhvi Gaur, Advocates. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ....Respondent Through: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP with SI versus Bhagat Singh, PS Ashok Vihar. Mr. Rajiv Mohan, Mr. Abhimanyu Kampani, Mr. Abhishek Shrivastava, Ms. Priyanka Singh, Mr. Ankur Rai, Mr. M.A. Karthik, Mr. Yuvraj Nain & Mr. Manish Phogat...
Sandeep Agarwal vs.priyanka Agarwal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~9 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:31. t October, 2018 + MAT.APP(F.C.)71/2017 SANDEEP AGARWAL ..... Appellant Through Mr. Pankaj Kumar Rajan, Advocate versus PRIYANKA AGARWAL ..... Respondent Through Mr. Mohan Lal, Advocate, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 20.12.2016 passed by the Family Court, by which on an application filed by the (wife)/respondent herein under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, maintenance has been fixed in the following manner: (a) The respondent shall pay an enhanced amount of maintenance @ Rs.12,000/- per month w.e.f. 30.10.2009; (b) The respondent shall pay an enhanced amount of maintenance @ Rs.15,000/- per month from April, 2011; (c) The respondent shall pay an enhanced amount of maintenance @ Rs.18,000/- per month from April, 2013; MAT.APP(F.C.)71/2017 Page 1 of 4 (d) The respondent shall pay an enhanced a...
Raj Kumar @ Raja vs.state ( Govt. Of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~62 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(CRL) 3239/2018 Judgment delivered on:31. 10.2018 RAJ KUMAR @ RAJA ........ Petitioner versus STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Jain with Ms. Ayushi Sharma, Advocates. For the... RESPONDENTS : Ms. Amita Sachdeva, Advocate for Ms. Richa Kapoor, ASC for State. SI Manish Tyagi, PS Gandhi Nagar. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT3110.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner, by this petition, had sought extension of parole granted by the Competent Authority.2. Parole was granted to enable the petitioner to file a special leave petition. By order dated 10.10.2018, parole granted to the petitioner was extended for a further period of two weeks, which expired on 25.10.2018 and the petitioner thereafter has surrendered.3.... Petitioner has sought parole on the ground that his wife is suffering from a skin disease and is admitted in...
Bharti Infratel Limited vs.the Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
* + + + + + + + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:27. 07.2018 Pronounced on:31. 10.2018 CEAC132016, C.M. APPL.37208/2016 VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED Appellant COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, DELHI ..... Respondent versus CEAC62017, C.M. APPL.6902/2017 & 37758/2017 COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, AHMEDABAD . Appellant M/S. VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED ..... Respondent versus CEAC42018, C.M. APPL.3649/2018 VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED Appellant COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, DELHI ..... Respondent versus Appellant Appellant SERTA142016, C.M. APPL.45647/2016 INDUS TOWERS LIMITED versus THE COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX NEW DELHI ..... Respondent SERTA152016 INDUS TOWERS LIMITED versus THE COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX NEW DELHI ..... Respondent SERTA162016 INDUS TOWERS LIMITED versus THE COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX NEW DELHI .... Respondent SERTA172016 INDUS TOWERS LIMITED versus THE COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX NEW DELHI .... Respondent SERTA182016, C.M. APPL.33...
M/S Band Box Pvt. Ltd. Vs.estate Officer, Punjab and Sind Bank and Anr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~ * % + W.P.(C) 1588/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:31. t October, 2018 M/S BAND BOX PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Nikhil Goel, Ms.Gurpreet Hora and Mr.Ashutosh, Advocates versus ESTATE OFFICER, PUNJAB AND SIND BANK AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Harish Katyal and Ms.Vinny Shangloo, Advocates for respondent No.2 Bank with Mr.Pronoy Ghosh, Senior Manager Law. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT1 The petitioner has challenged the order dated 28th November, 2017 whereby the learned District Judge allowed the petitioners appeal under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act (hereinafter referred to as Public Premises Act) and set aside the impugned order dated 23rd September, 2008 but rejected the petitioners prayer for refund of Rs.90,00,000/- paid by the petitioner to the respondents. Brief Facts 2. The petitioner is in occupation of showroom-cum-shop measuring 2222 sq. ft. on the ground fl...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »