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.
Amkay Laboratories Pvt Ltd vs.union of India and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:12. 10.2018 + W.P.(C) 7348/2015 AMKAY LABORATORIES PVT LTD versus ........ Petitioner UNION OF INDIA AND ANR Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ RESPONDENTS For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr Piyush Sharma and Mr K. G. Mishra, : Advocates. : Mr Kirtiman Singh, CGSC, Mr Manish : Mohan, CGSC with Ms Manisha Saroha, : Mr Waize Ali Noor, Mr Prateek Dhanka, : Ms Shruti Dutt and Mr Vikramaditya : Singh, Advocates. CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the notification S.O. No.607(E) dated 27.05.2003 (hereafter the impugned notification) issued by respondent no.2 (hereafter NPPA) fixing the ceiling price of Dexametosone plus Gentamycin Eye/Ear Drops. The petitioner also impugns the order dated 27.11.2008 passed by NPPA, inter alia, demanding a sum of 26,536/- from the petitioner on account of charging a price in ex...
Nisha &Anr vs.gaurav Sharma & Ors (Icici Lombard General Ins Co Ltd)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2018
$~26 * % + MAC.APP. 38/2018 NISHA &ANR IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:12. h October, 2018 Through: Mr.S.N. Parashar, Advocate ..... Appellants 1. versus GAURAV SHARMA & ORS (ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INS CO LTD) ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Sandeep Jha, Advocate for R-4 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) The appellants have challenged the Award of the Claims Tribunal whereby the compensation of Rs.27,10,360/- has been awarded to them. The appellants seek enhancement of compensation amount.2. The accident dated 14th January, 2012 resulted in the death of Ankit Gupta. The deceased was aged 31 years at the time of the accident and was survived by his widow and his parents who claimed the compensation. The deceased was self-employed and was earning Rs.1,99,259/- per annum.3. The Claims Tribunal took the income of the deceased as Rs.1,60,960/- per annum, added 50% towards future prospects, deducted 1/3rd towards his personal expenses and applied ...
Naseem Khan vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2018
$~6 & 31 (common order) IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + + Decided on:12. h October, 2018 CRL.M.C. 332/2015 and Crl.M.A.1352/2015 CRL.M.C. 3983/2018 and Crl.M.A.29567-29568/2018 NASEEM KHAN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Aman Usman, Advocate. versus STATE Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the ..... Respondent State with SI Dharmendra Singh, Cyber Cell/Special Cell. Mr. Rishab Raj Jain, Adv. for Complainant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is facing prosecution on the basis of reports under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) submitted in two different cases arising out of first information report (FIR) No.19/2006 of Police Station Defence Colony and FIR No.67/2006 of Police Station Lajpat Nagar. In each case, allegations have been made about his complicity in certain acts of commission or omission statedly constituting, inter alia, offences under Sectionof Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). In each case, charges h...
The State of Nct of Delhi vs.sumit Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2018
$- * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:07. 08.2018 Judgment delivered on:12. 10.2018 CRL.A. No.223/2018 THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for State with Mr. Ashray Behura, Advocate with SI Raj Kumar, PS-KM Pur. Mr. Bharat S. Kumar and Ms. Ankita Goswami, Advocates for Minor Victim. versus SUMIT KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sundeep Sehgal, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The State has preferred this appeal upon grant of leave to assail the judgment dated 15.12.2016 rendered by the learned ASJ-01, (Designated Special Court Under The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act)) District South East, New Delhi, Shri Sunil Chaudhary in Case No.1434/16, Sessions Case No.93/13, arising out of FIR No.49/13, CRL.A.No.223/2018 Page 1 of 48 registered at PS Kotla Mubarakpur under Section 376IPC and 6 POCSO Act, 2012 again...
Kailash Chandra Sharma vs.smt. Ragini
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2018
$~38 * % + MAT.APP(F.C.)269/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:12. h October, 2018 KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA ..... Appellant Through Mr. Randhir Singh and Mr. S.K. Gupta, Advocates versus SMT. RAGINI ..... Respondent Through Mr. Manee Mridul, Mr. Achintya Dvivedi and Mr. B.P. Pandey, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM APPL428062018 (exemption) 1.2. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exception. The application stands disposed of. MAT.APP(F.C.)269/2018 3. Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 24.09.2018 passed by the Family Court, by which a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking restitution of conjugal rights has been rejected on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. The impugned order dated 24.09.2018, reads as under: Ms. Rajkotia submits that this court has wrongly taken a view in another previously filed petition, between the present partie...
Shri Satpal vs.land and Building Department
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: October 12, 2018 + W.P.(C) 10926/2018 SHRI SATPAL Through: Mr. N.S. Dalal, Advocate .....Petitioner versus LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Additional Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) 1.... Petitioners application for allotment of alternate plot in lieu of acquired land stands dismissed vide impugned order of 27th May, 2014 due to non-submission of requisite documents. This is second round of litigation. In the first round, respondent vide order of 29th June, 2013 (Annexure P-7 colly.) was called upon to scrutinize petitioners application for allotment of alternate plot within a period of eight weeks, with permission to petitioner to remove the deficiencies within four weeks of receipt of Communication from respondent. Vide Communication of 24th August, 2013 (Annexure P-9 colly.), petitioner was intimated about the deficiencies...
Surender Singh vs.the Govt. Of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + WP(C) 7622/2002 Date of decision : October 12, 2018 SURENDER SINGH Through: Mr. L.R. Khatana, Adv. ....... Petitioner versus THE GOVT. OF DELHI & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA Through: Ms. Rashmi Gupta and Ms. Asiya, Advs. ........ RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT A.K. CHAWLA, J.1. By the writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of two orders dated 16.08.2001 and 19.11.2001 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal in short 'CAT', whereby, his challenge to the order dated 30.12.1994 of removal, was dismissed; the application seeking review of that order was also dismissed.2. The relevant facts are that in 1981 the petitioner was appointed as a 'Watcher' in the office of the Warden of Fisheries, Delhi Administration in the pay scale of `196-232/- and subsequently, made permanent. Thereafter, he was promoted from Group 'D' post to Grad...
Manish Kalra & Ors vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:11. h January, 2018 Decided on:12. h October, 2018 W.P.(CRL) 431/2016 MANISH KALRA & ORS Represented by: Mr. Saurabh Tiwari, Advocate. ........ Petitioners versus STATE & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Represented by: Ms. Purnima Malik, Advocate for Mr. Avi Singh, Additional Standing Counsel for the State/Respondent No.1 with SI Ram Singh, PS C.R. Park. Ms. Shilpika Kalra/ respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 By the present petition, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.390/2014 under Sections 498A/406 IPC registered at PS Chitranjan Park, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No.2.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the FIR got registered by respondent No.2 at Delhi is a clear abuse of the process of law. Even accepting the averments in the complaint, no case for cruelty as defined under Section 498A IPC is made out. The FIR discloses no allegations against the petitioners especially petitioners...
J. Chawla vs.vern Kumar Datt and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2018
* + % J.CHAWLA IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.949/2016 12th October, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja, Mr. Shrey Chathly, Ms. Bandana Kaur Grover and Muhammad Parbhesh, Advocates (Mobile No.9910211045). versus VERN KUMAR DATT AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Sonali Malhotra, Advocate for R-1 and R-2 (a),(b) & (c) [Mobile No.9818024129].. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) RFA No.949/2016 and C.M. Appl. No.45145/2016 (for stay) 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant No.3 in the RFA No.949/2016 Page 1 of 20 suit impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 30.07.2016 by which the trial court has decreed the suit for declaration and injunction filed by plaintiff nos. 1 and 2 and has restrained defendant no.3, being the exclusive owner of one portion of the property bearing No.11-B, Rajendra Park, N...
Vhb Life Sciences Inc vs.merck Sharp & Dohme Corp
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of decision: October 12, 2018 FAO(OS) 105/2018 VHB LIFE SCIENCES INC ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amarjit Singh, Mr. Ravikesh Sinha and Ms. Shubhi Sharma, Advs. versus MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Ms. Vaishali Mittal and Ms. Mrinali Menon, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.(ORAL) 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 7th May, 2018 in Suit No.CS(OS) 641/2008, whereby the learned Single Judge has closed the opportunity of the appellant herein to cross-examine PW-1 K.G. Ananthakrishnan.2. Mr. Pravin Anand, learned counsel for the respondent had, on the last date of hearing, taken an objection with regard to the maintainability of the appeal on the ground that the impugned order is not an appealable order under Order 43 Rule 1 CPC. He had relied upon the judgment of the Coordin...
- ‹ Prev
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- Next ›
- Last »