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.
Sudhir Kumar Nayyar vs.ansal Housing & Construction Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:11. h October, 2018. RSA932018 & CMs No.24651/2018 (for condonation of 21 days delay in filing the appeal) & 24652/2018 (for condonation of 330 days delay in re-filing the appeal) SUDHIR KUMAR NAYYAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Shashi Shanker and Ms. Pooja Mohanani, Advs. Versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 Through: None. ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD. ..... Respondent This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the judgment and decree [dated 21st January, 2017 in RCA No.326/2016 of the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge (West)]. of dismissal of First Appeal under Section 96 of the CPC filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree [dated 12th February, 2014 in Suit No.346/2004 of the Court of Civil Judge-03 (West)]. of dismissal of suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff for permanent and mandatory injunction.2. This appeal along with a...
R K Films & Media Academy vs.shree Omh Creations(soc) & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2018
$~1 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:11. 10.2018 ARB.P. 566/2017 R K FILMS & MEDIA ACADEMY Through Mr. Sameer Bhatnagar, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus SHREE OMH CREATIONS(SOC) & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Rishi Manchanda and Mr. Arun Kumar, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) I.A. 14106/2018 1.2. 3.4. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the rejoinder. The period of delay is fifteen (15) days. For the reasons given in the application, the delay is condoned. The application is, accordingly, disposed of. ARB.P. 566/2017 5. The record shows that the parties have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated 3.6.2009 (MOU).6. By virtue of this MOU, according to the petitioner, the respondents were obliged to produce a television serial to be aired on Doordarshan.7. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondents failed to discharge their obligations which propelled the petitioner t...
New Delhi House Flat Owners Association (Regd.) vs.a.v. Global Corpora ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2018
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:11. 10.2018 CO.PET. 736/2016 NEW DELHI HOUSE FLAT OWNERS ASSOCIATION (REGD.) ........ Petitioner Through Ms.Sunita Bhardwaj, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr.Ashok Nagrath, Adv.for petitioner (both counsel dispute the authority of each other) the Versus A.V. GLOBAL CORPORATION PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Peeyoosh Kalra and Ms.Sona Babbar, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition is filed under section 433(e) and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 for winding up of the respondent company. It is stated that the petitioner is an Association being registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and is responsible for renovation of the building New Delhi House which was constructed in 1974. It is further stated that the respondent company is indebted to the petitioner for a sum of Rs.1,18,000/- The petitioner raised invoice/bills bearing No.17 of 2016 for external renovat...
Jatin Sethi vs.state (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2018
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:11.10.2018 Bail Application No.1995/2018 JATIN SETHI versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent For the... Petitioner : For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. Lokesh Kumar Mishra & Mr. Himanshu Sharma, Advocates. Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, APP for the State with SI Sangita Tiwari, PS Ghazipur. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1110.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. No.34174/2018 1. By this application, the petitioner seeks amendment of the prayer clause to incorporate Section 328 IPC.2. Learned counsel submits that initially the FIR was registered only under Section 354A/354D/506 IPC and Section 8 POCSO Act. Subsequently during investigation in these proceedings, it was informed that Section 328 IPC has been added. For the reasons stated in the application, the application is 3. Bail Appln. No.1995/2018 Page 1 of 3 allowed. Reference in the Pray...
Neeraj Kishore & Ors vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2018
$~84 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 5227/2018 Judgment delivered on:11.10.2018 NEERAJ KISHORE & ORS STATE & ANR versus ........ Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: Mr. Vinod Paul, Adv. Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with SI Rameshwar Prasad. For the... Petitioner : For the... RESPONDENTS : CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1110.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. 34111/2018 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 5227/2018 1.... Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.263 of 2016 under Sections 498A/4IPC registered at Police Station Fatehpur Beri, based on a settlement. CRL.M.C. 5227/2018 Page 1 of 3 2.3. Subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that parties have settled their disputes and settlement dated 22.11.2017 has been arrived at between the parties before the Family Court, Dwarka. Parties have amicably dissolved the...
Montblanc-Simplo Gmbh vs.m/s Bajaj Belts & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2018
2 $~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 207/2018& I.As. 1641/2018 AND13562/2018 MONTBLANC-SIMPLO GMBH ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Advocate with Mr. Manish Biala, Advocate. versus M/S BAJAJ BELTS & ORS ..... Defendants Through: None. Date of Decision:11. h October, 2018 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Despite a pass over, none is present for the defendants. Consequently, this Court has no other option, but to proceed ahead with the present case.2. It is pertinent to mention that the present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing-off, damages, rendition of accounts, delivery up, etc.The prayer clause is reproduced hereinbelow:-"21. It is humbly prayed before this Honble Court that it may be pleased to grant:-"CS(COMM) 207/2018 Page 1 of 14 a) An order for permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their proprietors, officers, servants, agents, distributors, st...
Tata Aig General Insurance Co Ltd vs.shyam @ Deepak and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: October 11, 2018 + MAC.APP. 475/2017 TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rudra Kahlon and Ms. Vandana Kahlon, Advocates versus SHYAM @ DEEPAK AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. S.N.Parashar, Advocate for respondent-Claimant + MAC.APP. 1059/2017 1. SHYAM @ DEEPAK ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.N.Parashar, Advocate versus RAVI KUMAR & ORS (TATA AIG GEN INS CO LTD) .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rudra Kahlon and Ms. Vandana Kahlon, Advocates for respondent-Insurer CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) Impugned Award of 14th February, 2017 grants compensation of `4,35,462/- with interest @12% per annum to injured-Shyam @ Deepak(hereinafter referred to as Injured) aged 32 years, on account of grievous injuries suffered by him in a vehicular accident, which took place on 22nd November, 2011.2. In the above-captioned first appeal, TATA AIG General Insurance MAC.APPs. 475 & 1059 of 2017 Pag...
Dr. h.k Singh vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2018
$~8 & 9 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:11. h October, 2018 + CRL.M.C. 1158/2016 and Crl. M.A. 4966/2016 Dr. NEERAJ GOYAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Mr. Kumar Vaibhav and Ms. Rupali Samuel, Advocates versus STATE & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the State with Dr. Saba Naz, PNDT & MTP, Nodal Officer, Central District + CRL.M.C. 1729/2016 and Crl. M.A. 7356/2016 Dr. H.K SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Anil Airi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Krishan Kumar, Ms. I. Grover, Ms. Bindiya, Ms. Sadhna Sharma, Mr. Satyam Bhatia and Ms. Sunita Arora, Advocates versus STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the State with Dr. Saba Naz, PNDT & MTP, Nodal Officer, Central District CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. Both these petitions presented under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.PC) arise out of same proceedings that Crl. M.C. 1158/2016 & 1729/2016 Page 1 o...
Association of Apartment Owners of New Delhi House (Regd.) vs.pan Indi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2018
$~CP-31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of decision:11. 10.2018 CO.PET. 750/2016 ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF NEW DELHI HOUSE (REGD.) ........ Petitioner Through Ms.Sunita Bhardwaj, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr.Ashok Nagrath, Adv.for petitioner (both counsel dispute the authority of each other) the Versus PAN INDIA CORPORATION LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Chandra Shekhar Yadav, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition is filed under section 433(e) and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 for winding up of the respondent company.2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner association is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and is also acting in consonance with the Delhi Apartment Ownership Act, 1986. It is also stated that the petitioner raised invoice Bill No.89 of 2016 for Rs.1,03,800/- against the respondent towards augmented and upgraded electric installations of the building New De...
New Delhi House Flat Owners Association (Regd.) vs.ranutrol Industries ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2018
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:11. 10.2018 CO.PET. 733/2016 NEW DELHI HOUSE FLAT OWNERS ASSOCIATION (REGD.) ........ Petitioner Through Ms.Sunita Bhardwaj, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr.Ashok Nagrath, Adv.for petitioner (both counsel dispute the authority of each other) the Versus RANUTROL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ........... Respondent Through Mr.Aaditya Vijaykumar and Ms.Radhika Khanna, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition is filed under section 433(e) and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 for winding up of the respondent company. It is stated that the petitioner is an Association being registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and is responsible for renovation of the building New Delhi House which was constructed in 1974. It is further stated that the respondent company is indebted to the petitioner for a sum of Rs.1,02,515/- The petitioner raised invoice/bills bearing No.67 of 2016 for external ren...
- ‹ Prev
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- Next ›
- Last »