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.
Kulamani Biswal vs.union of India and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. September, 2018 Pronounced on:31. October, 2018 + W.P.(C) 6859/2018 KULAMANI BISWAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Krishnan Venugopal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Anish Gupta and Mr. Gaurav Wadhwa, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Adv. for R-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR Mr. Puneet Taneja, Adv. and Mr. Rajesh Mahendra, Adv. for R-2 JUDGMENT This writ petition, filed by Kulamani Biswal, seeks quashing of 1. three orders, viz. (i) order dated 14th December, 2017, whereby the petitioner was placed under suspension, by invoking Rule 20(1)(c) of the NTPC (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the CDA Rules), (ii) order dated 18th May, 2018, communicating the decision of the competent authority in the Ministry of Power (Respondent No.1), rejecting the representations, dated 8th March, 2018, 28th March, 2018 and 17th April, 2018, submitted by t...
Rajiv Kumar vs.state & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~O-23 & O-24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + 23 + 24 Date of Decision:31. t October, 2018 TEST.CAS. 60/2011 & I.A.12789/2011 SUDHA JHANWAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Ambar Qamaruddin, Mr.Ajay Talesara, Ms.Simmi Kaur Bagga, Advocates versus STATE & ANR Through: Mr. R.Y. Kalia, Mr.S.F. Kalia, Advocates for respondent No.2 ........ RESPONDENTS TEST.CAS. 51/2012 RAJIV KUMAR Through: Mr. R.Y. Kalia, Mr.S.F. Kalia, ........ Petitioner Advocates versus STATE & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Ambar Qamaruddin, Mr.Ajay Talesara, Ms.Simmi Kaur Bagga, Advocates for respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Late Shanti Swarup Gupta and Rattan Kumari executed a joint Will dated 21st July, 2002 whereby they bequeathed their estate to their son, Rajiv Kumar and daughter, Sudha Jhanwar. Rattan Kumari expired on 27th August, 2008 and Shanti Swarup Gupta expired on 14th April, 2011. The daughter, Sudha Jhanwar has filed Test. Cas.60/2011 for grant...
Vodafone Mobile Services Limited vs.commissioner of Service Tax, 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 CEAC122016, C.M. APPL.37207/2016 VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED Appellant COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, DELHI ..... Respondent versus 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 SERTA142016, C.M. APPL.45647/2016 INDUS TOWERS LIMITED THE COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX NEW DELHI versus Appellant ..... Respondent SERTA152016 INDUS TOWERS LIMITED THE COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX NEW DELHI versus Appellant SERTA162016 INDUS TOWERS LIMITED Appellant ..... Respondent CEAC122016 and other connected matter Page 1 of...
Indus Towers 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...
Pankaj Dayal vs.sushil Jain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~5 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:31. t October, 2018 RFA(OS) 22/2018 CM No.16489/2018 (Stay) PANKAJ DAYAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Sudhir Nandrajog, Senior Advocate with Ms.Preet Singh, Advocate. versus Through: ..... Respondent CORAM: SUSHIL JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM.APPL164902018 (delay of 664 days) & RFA(OS) 22/2018 1. This is an application under Order XLI Rule-3A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking condonation of delay of 664 days in filing the present appeal.2. Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant/appellant submits that delay has been on account of reasons beyond the control of the applicant/appellant. The applicant/appellant had engaged services of a counsel, paid his fees and he was under the impression that he would look after the bes...
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors. Vs.state of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:6. h September, 2018 Decided on:31. t October, 2018 + CRL.A. 574/2015 & Crl.M.A.No.8003/2015 ZULFIKAR NASIR & ORS. ... Appellants Through: Ms. Rebecca John, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Harsh Bora, Ms. Ratna Appender & Ms. Megha Bahl, Advocates. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. ...... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Kaushal Yadav, PP with Mr. Ram Kishor Singh Yadav, AOR and Mr. Zaki Ahmed Khan, Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sanjay Bhardwaj & Mr. Vikas Bhadauria, Advocates for State of UP. Mr. Gopal Krishna & Mr. B.P. Sharma, Advocates for Respondent Nos.2, 12 & 15. Mr. Aamir Khan, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3, 6, 7 & 8. Mr. L.D. Mual, Mr.R.P.Duggal, Mr. Virender K. Mual & Mr. Yoginder Singh, Advocates for Respondent Nos. 4, 9, 10, 11 & 13. Mr.S.A.A Abdi, Advocate Additional SPP. Ms. Vrinda Grover & Mr. Soutik Bannerjee, for Intervenor/NHRC. Advocates for Crl.A.574, 629 and 884 of 2015 Page 1 of 73 + CRL.A. 629/2015 & Crl. M. A. Nos. 7952/201...
Ran Singh vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:31. 10.2018 % BAIL APPLN. 614/2018 RAN SINGH STATE Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. D.K. Rai, Mr. Upendra Kumar Nagar, Mr. Manish and Mr. Ajay P. Tushir, Advs. Ms. Meenakshi Dahia, Addl. PP for the State with Inspr. Pushp Lata, PS Prasad Nagar : For the Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA % ORDER3110.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.108/2018 under Section 376 of the IPG registered at Police station Karol Bagh (now transferred to Police Station Prasad Nagar).2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is, in fact, a case of honey trap. It is contended that the WhatsApp conversation shows that the petitioner was lured by the complainant. BAIL APPLN. 614/2018 Pag...
Hindustan Syringes & Medical Devices Limited vs.disposafe Health and L ...
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...
Manju Panwar vs.v.p.s. Panwar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI REV.PET.544/2016, C.M. APPL.45942/2016 IN MAT.APP. (F.C.) 90/2014 Reserved on:25. 09.2018 Pronounced on:31. 10.2018 MANJU PANWAR ..... Appellant V.P.S. PANWAR Through: : Dr. Manmohan Sharma, Advocate. Versus ..... Respondent Through: Sh. S.K. Sharma, Sh. Rahul Sharma and Sh. Prayas Aneja, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.CHAWLA S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.1. The petitioner seeks review of the final judgment of this court, dismissing her appeal; in that, the findings and decree of dissolution of marriage between her and the respondent/husband were affirmed.2. Various diverse grounds were urged on behalf of the petitioner during the hearing of the present review petition. Firstly, it is urged that the evidence of the parties children (i.e. their daughter and son) ought to have been appreciated in their proper perspective. Secondly, it is urged that the review petitioners claim for enhanced maintenance, ...
Abbas Hakim vs.vipin Gupta & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.626/2006 & RFA No.177/2007 31st October, 2018 ABBAS HAKIM ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Sanjay Kumar Shandilya, Adv. (Mobile No.9810379305). versus VIPIN GUPTA & ANR. Through: Mr. Bhushan Kapur, Adv. (Mobile No.9899898765). ........ RESPONDENTS + % RFA6262006 RFA1772007 CHAITRA ADVERTISING P. LTD. Through: None. versus ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS VIPIN GUPTA & ANR. Through: Mr. Bhushan Kapur, Adv. (Mobile No.9899898765). CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. These two appeals are filed by the two defendants in the suit impungning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 03.07.2006 by which the trial court has decreed the suit filed by respondent no.1/plaintiff/Sh. Vipin RFA Nos. 626/2006 & 177/2007 Page 1 of 9 Gupta and passed a money decree for the suit amount of Rs.10,35,000/- with interest against the two defendants who were held jointly and severally liable....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »