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.
Bhuvneshwar Sachdeva vs.kavita Sachdeva
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2018
$~15 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:29. h October, 2018 + MAT.APP(F.C.) 43/2018 & CM Nos. 6701/2018, 42182-183/2018 BHUVNESHWAR SACHDEVA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Yadunandan Bansal and Mr. Amit Kumar, Advs. with the appellant in person versus KAVITA SACHDEVA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S.K. Sharma and Mr. Vishal Vashist, Advs. 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 06.12.2017 by which an application filed by the respondent/wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking maintenance has been allowed. The Family Court has fixed the maintenance @15,000/- per month.2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Family Court has failed to take into consideration that the respondent/wife has been working and her income has not been considered while fixing the maintenance. It is also contended before us that the Family Court has pass...
Sumita Roy vs.giani Ram (Deceased) Thr Lrs
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % SUMITA ROY RFA No.881/2018 29th October, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Advocate (Mobile No.9568113936). versus GIANI RAM (DECEASED) THR LRS ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. No.44923/2018 (for exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. C.M. Appl. No.44924/2018 (for delay in filing of 19 days) & C.M. Appl. No.44925/2018 (for delay in re-filing of 5 days) 2. For the reasons stated in the applications, delays in filing and re-filing the appeal are condoned, subject to just exceptions. C.Ms stand disposed of. RFA No.881/2018 Page 1 of 10 RFA No.881/2018 3. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the plaintiff in the suit impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 18.05.2018. The suit which was filed by the appel...
Hindustan Steel Works Construction vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:29. h October, 2018 + FAO(OS) 160/2018 & CM. Nos. 45167/2018 and 45168/2017 HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION..... Appellant Through: Ms.Shipra Ghose, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Jagjit Sigh, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr.Vipin Chaudhary, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.(ORAL) CM No.45168/2018 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. FAO(OS) 160/2018 1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 35(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Rules. FAO (OS) 160/2018 Page 1 of 13 2. Suffice to state, the provisions have been wrongly quoted. It appears to be typographical errors which has been overlooked by the Registry also. The concerned Registrar must look into the same and ensure that such mistakes do not ...
Surender Pal Singh Chauhan vs.state and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Reserved on:12. 09.2018 Pronounced on:29. 10.2018 W.P.(C) 2828/2010 and CM No.677/2018 SURENDER PAL SINGH CHAUHAN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K. Saini, Adv. along with petitioner in person. versus STATE AND ANR Through: ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Bhanu Gupta, Adv. for Mr.Ankur Chhibber, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Viraj R. Datar, Adv. for R-2. Mr. P.P. Khurana, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Tamali Wad, Adv. Mr. Nitin Mishra and Mr. Sudhir, Advs. for R-5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.CHAWLA S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the process of selection of appointment to the post of the Additional District Judge under Article 233(2) of the Constitution of India (hereafter as Constitution); the vacancies were part of the cadre of the Delhi Higher Judicial Service which is governed by the Rules framed under Articleof the Constitution. W.P.(C)No.2828/2010 Page 1 of 7 2. The petitioner had not initially impl...
Savitur Prasad vs.uoi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2018
$~22 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:29. h October, 2018 + CRL.A. 1094/2018 SAVITUR PRASAD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate with Ms. Garima Sharma, Adv. versus UOI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Jasmeet Singh, CGSC for R-1. Mr. Naresh K. Adv. for R-2 to R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner, then working as Additional Controller General of Defence Accounts (Addl. CGDA) had approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) by original application (no.707/17) raising certain grievances vis--vis his claim for being considered for promotion to the post of Controller General of Defence Accounts (CGDA). It appears that the claim of the petitioner before the CAT was based on standing in terms of merit. His petition was resisted, inter alia, by a short reply (on affidavit) of the fourth respondent, he being an Under Secretary in Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). In the said affidavit, it was, inter a...
Karu Paswan vs.chandravati & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % KARU PASWAN RFA No.880/2018 29th October, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Akhilesh Singh, Advocate (Mobile No.7248517989). versus CHANDRAVATI & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. No.44920/2018 (for exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. C.M. Appl. Nos. 44919/2018 (for delay in filing) and 44922/2018 (for delay in re-filing) 2. For the reasons stated in the applications the delays of 91 days in filing the appeal and 55 days in re-filing the appeal stand condoned, subject to just exceptions. C.Ms. stand disposed of. RFA No.880/2018 Page 1 of 5 RFA8802018 and C.M. Appl. No.44921/2018 (for stay) 3. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant No.2 in the suit impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 27.01.2017 by whi...
Icici Bank Ltd. Vs.shishupal Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. h October, 2018 * % + W.P.(C) 5060/2018 ICICI BANK LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Puneet K. Bhalla, Adv. versus SHISHUPAL SINGH Through: ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.(ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner ICICI Bank Ltd. challenging the order dated 14th March, 2018 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-III, New Delhi holding the Original Application being 512/2017 not maintainable on the ground of territorial jurisdiction and directed the Registrar of the Tribunal to return the plaint of the petitioner bank along with certificate of court fee for filing the same before the appropriate Tribunal.2. It is the submission of Mr. Puneet K. Bhalla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Bank that the Tribunal has erred in not appreciating the position of law in terms of Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy A...
State Trading Corporation of India vs.finnpap
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2018
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on : October 01, 2018 Judgment pronounced on : October 29, 2018 FAO(OS) 204/2005 & CM APPL. 6405/2012 STATE TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rakesh Tiku, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Arpan Wadhawan, Ms. Gayatri Misra and Mr. Gaurav Kohli, Advs. versus FINNPAP ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Jayant Mehta, Mr. Gautam Khaitan and Ms. Bharti, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA JUDGMENT A.K. CHAWLA, J.(in short 1. The State Trading Corporation (STC) appeals a judgment and order of the learned single judge, under Section 39 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 'the old Act'). The impugned judgment rejected STCs objections to the award dated 17.12.1998 published by the arbitral tribunal. The award was made rule of the court. Post decretal interest was awarded @ 9% per annum on the principal sum determined till the date of payment. FAO(OS) 204/2005 Page 1 of 15 During p...
Som Pan Products Pvt Ltd vs.revision Authority, Department of Revenue
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2018
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision:29. 10.2018 W.P.(C)No.3903/2018 SOM PAN PRODUCTS PVT LTD ........ Petitioner Through : Dr. Seema Jain, Mr. Ajay K. Jain, Mr. Dushyant K. Mahant and Ms. Shova Choudhary, Advs. versus REVISION AUTHORITY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Through : Mr. Harpreet ..... Respondent Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Suhani Mathur, Advs. Singh, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(ORAL) Claiming to be aggrieved by the Revisional Authoritys order 1. under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act, the present writ petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of the impugned order as well as the order in appeal by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals).2. The facts of this case are that the petitioner manufactured W.P.(C)No.3903/2018 Page 1 of 9 Gutkha and forwarded two consignments for export purposes. It claimed the benefit of excise rebate in terms of Rule 18 of the Central E...
Director (Medical) Delhi & Ors. Vs.m/s. Forsan Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:29. 10.2018 CM (M) No.1312/2018 DIRECTOR (MEDICAL) DELHI & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Yakesh Anand, Mr. Nimit Mathur, Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocates with Mr. N.K. Arora, Addl. Director & Mr. Dhruv Prasad, Asstt. versus M/S. FORSAN HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD. ....Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL VINOD GOEL, J.(ORAL) C.M. No.45111/2018 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. CM (M) No.1312/2018 & C.M. No.45110/2018 (for stay) 1. This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order dated 04.07.2018 of the learned Additional District Judge-01, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in MCA No.15/2017 dismissing the petitioners appeal against the order dated 07.06.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sr. Civil Judge (ASCJ), New Delhi whereby their application to review the order dated 06.04.2017 was dismissed. By order da...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »