Delhi Court October 2018 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.
Jagjeet Singh vs.sajjan Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:30. 10.2018 CRL.REV.P. 672/2017 JAGJEET SINGH SAJJAN SINGH versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent : Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA None. : Mr. Sandeep Thukral, Advocate. JUDGMENT3010.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner impugns order on conviction dated 17.04.2017 as well as order on sentence dated 25.04.2017 whereby the petitioner has been convicted of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo an imprisonment for a period of four months as also to pay an amount of Rs. 1,80,000/- as compensation and in default to further undergo an imprisonment for a period of three months. CRL.REV.P. 672/2017 Page 1 of 3 2. The cheque amount was of Rs. 90,000/-. Parties have settled their disputes. As per the settlement, the petitioner has agreed to pay a total amount of Rs. One ...
Inderjeet vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 1197/2013 Reserved on:11. h October, 2018 Decided on:30. h October, 2018 INDERJEET .....Appellant Through: Mr. Javed Alvi with Mr. Subrat versus Chouhan, Advocates. STATE ....Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State. + CRL.A. 1534/2013 VIKAS TOKAS @ VICKY .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ram Singh Soni & Mr. Ashok Kumar Soni, Advocates. versus STATE ....Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VINOD GOEL JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. These two appeals are directed against the judgment dated 16th July, 2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, South District, Saket Courts in Sessions Case No.50/2011 arising out of FIR No.139/2011 registered at Police Station (PS) Vasant Vihar convicting both Appellants Crl. A. Nos. 1197/2013 & 1534/2013 Page 1 of 28 for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 IPC and additionally Appellant Vikas Tokas @ ...
Rahul Gupta vs.girdhari Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:9. h October, 2018 Judgment delivered on:30. h October, 2018 + CRL.M.C. 2306/2013 SAKET SINGH & ORS GIRDHARI LAL + CRL.M.C. 2307/2013 RAHUL GUPTA GIRDHARI LAL + CRL.M.C. 241/2014 DEBABRATA MISHRA versus versus versus GIRDHARI LAL ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr. Ankur Aggarwal and Mr. Nitin Sharma, Advs in Crl.M.C.2306/2013 Mr. Omung Gupta and Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advs. in Crl.M.C.2307/2013 Mr. J.P. Mishra, Adv. in Crl.M.C.241/2014 For the Respondent: Mr. Vijay Kr. Singh, Adv. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Crl M.C23062013, Crl.M.C.2307/2013 & Crl.M.C.241/2014 Page 1 of 10 JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.CRL.M.C. 2306/2013 & Crl. M.A. 8876/2013 (stay), 4574/2014 (for bringing on record additional facts); CRL.M.C. 2307/2013 & Crl. M.A. 8879/2013 (stay) & CRL.M.C. 241/2014 & ...
Amit Chaudhary vs.the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
Judgment delivered on:30. 10.2018 BAIL APPLN. 2206/2018 $~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + AMIT CHAUDHARY THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Advocates who appeared in this case: versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : Mr. V.C. Gautam and Mr. Vikas Tomar, Advs. Mr. Meenakshi Dahiya, Addl. PP for the State CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT3010.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.159/2018 under Sections 457/380/4of the IPC registered at Police Station Anand Parbat, New Delhi.2. The allegations against the petitioner are that the complainant who had a factory of manufacturing jeans. It is alleged that 30 rolls of jeans material were stolen from the factory of the complainant. BAIL APPLN. 2206/2018 Page 1 of 3 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated.4. 5. Status report has been filed. The same is taken on record. As per the...
M/S. Krishna Auto Sales vs.pearl Polymers Ltd. & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
$~95 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CM(M) 1300/2018 & CM APPL. 44658/2018 M/S KRISHNA AUTO SALES ........ Petitioner Through: Ms.Jyoti Mendiratta, Advocate. versus PEARL POLYMERS LTD & ANR Through: None. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL ORDER3010.2018 % The order dated 13.09.2018 passed by the Court of Ld. Additional 1. District Judge-06, South East, Saket Court, New Delhi is the subject matter of challenge in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner/defendant No.2. The respondent No.1/plaintiff has filed a suit for mandatory injunction and damages against the respondent No.2/defendant No.1 and the petitioner/defendant No.2 on the ground that he has not been supplied with Form 21 and 22 with regard to the Skoda Superb car which he has purchased from them.2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that there was no privity of contract between the petitioner/defendant No.2 and the respondent ...
Om Prakash Sharma vs.legislative Assembly of the National Capital Terr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
* IN THE HIGH CO URT O F DE L HI AT NEW DE LHI % Judgment reserved on:09. h May, 2018 Judgment delivered on:30. h October, 2018 + W.P.(C) 5629/2016 & CM No.23368/2016 (interim direction) OM PRAKASH SHARMA ........ Petitioner Versus LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF THE NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI THR SECRETARY AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Ms. Vibha Makhija, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manik Dogra and Ms. Aditi Mohan, Ms. Nitya Sharma and Ms.Disha Vaish, Advs. For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gautam Narayan and Mr. R.A. Iyer and Ms. Surya Rajappana and Ms. Mahamaya Chatterjee, Advocates for GNCTD. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGEMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J1... Petitioner seeks setting aside of the Motion passed by the Legislative Assembly of National Capital Territory of Delhi on 31.03.2016 (communicated to the petitioner by letter dated 01.04.2016), whereby... Petitioner has been susp...
Vipin Bhardwaj vs.ashok Bhalla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
$~99 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order:30. 10.2018 CM(M) 363/2018 VIPIN BHARDWAJ ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Zahid Ali, Advocate. versus ASHOK BHALLA Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL CM APPL126262018 (for Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM APPL126282018 (for condonation of delay) 2. For the reasons stated in the application the delay of 13 days in re-filing the petition is condoned. The application is disposed of. CM(M) 363/2018 & CM No.12627/2018 (for stay) 3. The order dated 20.12.2017 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (ADJ), dismissing the appeal of the petitioner/appellant/defendant against the order dated 13.10.2016 in MCA No.45216/2016 declining his application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil CM (M) No.363/2018 Page 1 of 6 Procedure, 1908 (CPC), is the subject matter of challenge in this petition filed under Article...
Jai Singh vs.state & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
$~3 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"30th October, 2018 CRL. M.C. 1327/2015 JAI SINGH STATE & ORS. Through: Mr. Abhimanyu Gupta for Mr. ........ Petitioner M.S. Vinayak, Adv. versus Through: Mr. K.S. Ahuja, APP for the ........ RESPONDENTS State with SI Sandeep Yadav, PS Mehrauli. Mr. L.K. Verma, Ms. Bobby Verma, & Mr. Ajay Verma, Advs. for R-2, 4 & 5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner had addressed a complaint on 21.07.2000 to the station house officer of police station Mehrauli making allegations, inter alia, against the private party respondents claiming that he had been cheated. The police not having acted upon the said complaint, he filed the criminal complaint (CC No.47/1/2003) before the court of Metropolitan Magistrate, it resulting in preliminary inquiry on the basis of which, the said respondents stood summoned. On the basis of pre-charge evidence that was adduced, the Metropolitan Magistrate considered the case for furt...
Naveen Kumar vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * + $~9 & 10 AJIT SINGH W.P.(C) 7150/2017 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitin K. Gupta and Mr. Rahul Sinha, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate for R- 10 1 to R-6. + NAVEEN KUMAR W.P.(C) 7152/2017 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitin K. Gupta and Mr. Rahul Sinha, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate for R- CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA1to R-6. ORDER3010.2018 % Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. These are two writ petitions preferred by Mr. Ajit Singh and Mr. Naveen Kumar respectively arising from the same background facts. Both these W.P.(C) 7150/2017 & 7152/2017 Page 1 of 12... Petitioners responded to an advertisement issued by Respondent No.4, viz. the Staff Selection Commission (SSC), inviting applications for recruitment of Sub Inspectors (SI) in the Central Police Organisation (CPO), Assistant SIs in the ...
Court on Its Own Motion vs.inspector Manoj Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
#2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:30. 10.2018 CONT.CAS.(CRL) 16/2018 COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION ........ Petitioner versus INSPECTOR MANOJ KUMAR ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jayant K. Mehta, Ms. Aakashi Lodha, Mr. Sajeevi Seshadri, Mr. Aaditya Vijakumar, Mr. Hemant Kumar, Mr. Pulkit Kaushik and Ms. Drishti Harpalani, Advocates Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel with Mr. Chaitanya Gosain and Mr. Tushar Sannu, Advocates for State SI Vijay Kumar, PS Mayur Vihar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) CONT.CAS.(CRL) 16/2018 Page 1 of 6 1. The present criminal contempt petition has been initiated on a reference received from a learned Single Judge of this Court.2. The backdrop, in which it arises, can be briefly encapsulated as follows:3. The petitioner, Ms. Mala alias ...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »