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.
Sangeeta Thapar vs.director Education and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8911/2011 & CM APPL. 20174/2011 Reserved on:8. h October, 2018 Pronounced on:25. h October, 2018 1. SANGEETA THAPAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Atul Bandhu, Adv. versus DIRECTOR EDUCATION AND ANR ...... RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Aditi Gupta, Adv. for Ms.Latika Chaudhary, Adv. for R-1 Mr. P.D. Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Adv. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT % Pursuant to the disciplinary proceedings conducted against her, the services of the petitioner, a teacher in the Respondent No.2- School (hereinafter referred to as the School) were terminated, vide order dated 25th April, 2003, passed by the Principal of the School.2. Her appeal, against the said order of termination, was also dismissed, by the Delhi School Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as learned Tribunal) vide order dated 15th July, 2011. W.P.(C) 8911/2011 Page 1 of 46 3. The petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court by...
Lk (Prosecutrix) vs.state of Delhi Nct & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~14 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:25. h October, 2018 CRL. M.C. 4181/2016 LK (PROSECUTRIX) ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Mr. A.S. Pujari, Mr. Zeeshan Diwan, Ms. Rupali Samuel & Ms. Surabhi Dhar, Advs. versus STATE OF DELHI NCT & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. K.S. Ahuja, APP for the State with SI RN Ashang Somatai, PS Patel Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is the complainant (prosecutrix) in the criminal case arising out of first information report (FIR) No.145/2015 which was registered by police station Patel Nagar on 15.02.2015, whereby investigation was taken up into offences allegedly committed under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POSCO Act) and Sections 23 and 26 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2000. In the said FIR she had indicated her age to be 17 years and she accused the second respondent of having subject...
Nadeem Majid Oomerbhoy vs.gautam Tank & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO(OS) (COMM) No.341/2016 Date of decision:25. h October, 2018 NADEEM MAJID OOMERBHOY ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Puri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vikram Mehta, Ms. Rishika Rama and Mr. Rounak Biswas, Advocates. versus GAUTAM TANK & ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sudeep Chatterjee and Mr. Rohan Swarup, Advocates for R-1 and R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) This intra-Court appeal impugns order dated 25th October, 2016, whereby I.A. No.13305/2016, filed by the appellant, who is plaintiff in CS (OS) No.806/2005, under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Code, for short), has been dismissed by the learned single Judge.2. The appellant had filed the aforesaid suit for injunction against infringement of trademark and passing off in respect of mark Postman. Vide order dated 12th December, 2007, the application filed by the appellant FAO(OS)...
Ambience Developers & Infrastructure pvt.ltd. Vs.commissioner of Incom ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
+ + * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:25. 10.2018 W.P.(C) 10572/2018 & CM Nos.41219-20/2018 AMBIENCE DEVELOPERS & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD. ........ Petitioner Through : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Mr. Somil Agarwal, Mr. Rohit Kumar Gupta and Ms. Monika Ghai, Advs. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Deepak Anand, Jr. Standing Counsel for Revenue. W.P.(C) 10627/2018 & CM Nos.41373-74/2018 AMBIENCE HOTELS & RESORTS PVT.LTD. ........ Petitioner Through : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Mr. Somil Agarwal, Mr. Rohit Kumar Gupta and Ms. Monika Ghai, Advs. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Deepak Anand, Jr. Standing Counsel for Revenue. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. CHAWLA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.1. These two writ petitions one by M/s Ambience Developers and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (hereafter as ADI) being W.P.(C)...
Delhi Airport Metro Exptress Private Limited (India) vs.construcciones ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~J * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Pronounced on:25. 10.2018 OMP (COMM.)7/2017 DELHI AIRPORT METRO EXPTRESS PRIVATE LIMITED (INDIA) ..Petitioner Through Mr.P.Chidambaram, Sr.Adv. with Agrawala, Ms.Malavika Lal and Mr.Vikrant Pachnanda, Advs. Mr.Rishi Versus CONSTRUCCIONES Y AUXILIAR DE FERROCARRILES & ANR. Respondent Through Mr.Arun Kathpalia, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Tanuj Bhushan, Mr.Shantanu Tyagi, Mr.Samaksh Goyal and Ms.Nandita Chauhan, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. This petition is filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to challenge the final award dated 22.8.2016, partial award on jurisdiction dated 2.2.2015 and partial award on costs of jurisdictional challenge dated 15.12.2015 passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal.2. I may note that when this matter came up for hearing on 10.1.2017 notice was issued confined to the issue of maintainability of the present petition under section 34 of the Arb...
Mahabir Parshad vs.m/s Kanhaiya Lal Sri Ram
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~ *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. h October, 2018 + W.P.(C) 8027/2014 % 1. MAHABIR PARSHAD ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Robin R David, Adv. with Mr. Dhiraj Philip and Mr. Febin M. Varghese, Advs. versus M/S KANHAIYA LAL SRI RAM ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ankit Jain, Adv. with Mr. Siddhant Nath, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) The Award of the Labour Court, dated 6th February, 2002, from which this writ petition germinates, addressed and answered, the following term of reference, as contained in the referral order dated 29th October, 1998: Whether the services of Sh. Mahavir Prasad have been terminated illegally and/or unjustifiably by the management, and if so, to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect?. 2. The case of the petitioner-workman, as pleaded before the Labour Court, is that he had been employed with the respondent, as Munim, on a monthly salary of 6,150/-, since 1st ...
Central Park Estates Pvt Ltd & Anr vs.lancor Holdings Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
2 $~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 456/2017 CENTRAL PARK ESTATES PVT LTD & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Mr. R.K. Jain and Mr. Devanshu Jain, Advocates with Mr. Vikram Kumar, authorised representative of the plaintiffs. versus LANCOR HOLDINGS LIMITED % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN Date of Decision:25. h October, 2018 Through: Mr. Tahir A.J., Advocate. ..... Defendant MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) JUDGMENT1 Present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trade marks, unfair trade practice, damages etc.2. In the plaint, it has been averred that the plaintiffs are the registered proprietor of the trade mark CENTRAL PARK. It is further averred that the defendant has illegally adopted the impugned mark THE CENTRAL PARK.3. On 26th September, 2018, the parties requested the learned Local Commissioner to place the matter before the Court as the defendants had agreed to suffer the decree in terms of the prayer clause and h...
Pentel Kabushiki Kaisha & Anr vs.m/s Arora Sationers and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~OS-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of decision:25. 10.2018 CS(COMM) 361/2017 PENTEL KABUSHIKI KAISHA & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr.Saurabh Banerjee and Mr. Afzal versus B. Khan, Advs. M/S ARORA SATIONERS AND ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr.Shailen Bhatia, Ms.Ekta Nayar Saini, Mr.Shivam, Mr.Saltanat and Ms.Vidushi, Mr.H.P.Singh and Mr.Navroop Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) IA No.646/2018 1. This application is filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC on behalf of defendants No.2 and 3 seeking amendment of the written statement. It is pleaded in the application that the issues have been framed and the present suit is listed for the plaintiffs evidence. In the meantime, it is pleaded that defendant No.3 has received a Certificate of Registration for Design No.282909 in Class 19-06 for the Pen bearing the name MONTEX MASTANI from the Office of Controller of Designs, Design Office Kolkata in respect of the application for registra...
Mahinder Lal Kapoor (Deceased) Now Represented by Varsha Kapoor vs.raj ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.521-522/2006 + % MAHINDER LAL KAPOOR (DECEASED) NOW REPRESENTED BY VARSHA KAPOOR25h October, 2018 Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Dilip Kumar, Advocate (M. No.9873987294). RAJESHWARI versus Through: Mr. Ashish Rana, Advocate ..... Respondent with Mr. Anurag Kumar Singh, Advocate (M. No.9650250561). CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. 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 05.09.2005 by which trial court has dismissed the suit for specific performance filed by the appellant/plaintiff with respect to the Agreement to Sell dated RFA No.521-522/2006 Page 1 of 19 18.07.1996 for the property on a plot of 22.5 sq yards situated at D-8, Old Seemapuri, Delhi, comprising of one shop, one room, staircase on the ground floor, two rooms, staircase ...
Food Corporation of India, Bhatinda vs.m/s Hindustan Rice Mills, Rampu ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~35 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. h October, 2018 O.M.P. 579/2012 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, BHATINDA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Mohan Lal Sharma, Advocate (M-9811537909). versus M/S HINDUSTAN RICE MILLS, RAMPURS PHUL BHATINDA ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH The present petition under Section 34 of Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) 1. the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenges the award dated 29th February, 2012 passed by the Learned Sole Arbitrator. The... Petitioner Food Corporation of India (hereinafter, FCI) and 2. M/s Hindustan Rice Mills (hereinafter miller) had entered into a milling agreement dated 17th October, 1994. Under the said contract, the miller was to mill the paddy and supply rice to the FCI. FCI had supplied 38660 bags (25128.50.000 quintals) of fine variety to the miller for milling. It is claimed by FCI that the miller had milled only 15554 bags (9907.89.800 quintals) of paddy by 28th ...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »