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.
M/S National Highways Authority of India vs.m/s Itd-Sdb(jv)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:28. 08.2018 Judgment pronounced on:31. 10.2018 O.M.P. 622/2014 + M/S NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ........ Petitioner Through: Ms. Gunjan Sinha Jain with Ms. M/S ITD-SDB(JV) Soumya Priyadarshnee, Advs. versus Through: Ms. Kiran Suri, Senior Advocate with Ms. Anusuya Salwan, Ms. Aishwarya Kumar and Ms. Nikita Salwan, Advs. ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.1. This is a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short"199. Act"). Via this petition, challenge is laid to the award dated 28.01.2014, passed by the Arbitral Tribunal comprising technical Members. The petitioner i.e. National Highways Authority of India (hereafter referred to as NHAI) was the claimant before the Arbitral Tribunal.2. The record shows that prior to the disputes being referred to the Arbitral Tribunal, the respondent (hereafter referred to as Contractor) had in accor...
Arun International vs.oriental Bank of Commerce & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~12 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 556/2018 ARUN INTERNATIONAL ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sushil Kumar Pandey, Mr. B.B. Gupta and Ms. Neha Sharma, Advs. Versus ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE & ANR. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW Through: None. ..... Defendants ORDER3110.2018 % IA No.14976/2018 (for exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.2. The application is disposed of. CS(OS) 556/2018 & IA No.14975/2018 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) 3. The plaintiff has instituted this suit impleading Oriental Bank of Commerce (OBC) as defendant No.1 thereto and ECGC Ltd. as defendant No.2 thereto.4. It is inter alia the case of the plaintiff in the plaint, (i) that it is engaged in the business of export of goods and has taken credit from defendant No.1 OBC and the export on credit is subject to the guarantee from defendant No.2 ECGC Ltd.; (ii) that the defendant No.1 OBC served a notice dated 17th July, 2018 under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstru...
The Director General (Works) Cpwd vs.the General Secretary Cpwd Mazdoo ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2018
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:31. t October, 2018 + W.P.(C) 11023/2018 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL (WORKS) CPWD ........ Petitioner Through: Ms.Vibha Mahajan Seth, Adv. Ms. Laimon Rani Burmo, Adv. % 1. versus THE GENERAL SECRETARY CPWD MAZDOOR UNION Through: ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) This writ petition, at the instance of the Director General (Works), CPWD, assails Award, dated 30th October, 2017, passed by the Labour Court, answering the following reference, made to it by the Central Government under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ID Act): Whether Shri Satpal S/o Shri Balbir Singh is entitled to be regularized as MLD with effect from 04.04.2003 with all consequential benefits from the date when the services of his juniors were regularized with effect from 04.04.2003?. If not, what directions are necessary in this respect?. 2. As per the Statement of Claim ...
Anmol Kumar Singh & Anr. Vs.state Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + BAIL APPLN. 2006/2017 Judgment delivered on:30.10.2018 ANMOL KUMAR SINGH & ANR ........ Petitioners versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Mr. M.Z. Chaudhary, Advocate. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners : For the Respondent CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State. SI Upendra Kumar, PS New Ashok Nagar. : JUDGMENT3010.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.535/2017 under Sections 323/341/4IPC, Police Station New Ashok Nagar.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the complainant along with his friends had gone to attend a birthday party. After attending the party at night when they were coming back one of their friends started vomiting. It is alleged that when he was vomiting, the petitioners came on the spot and objected to the same. Thereafter, an altercation took place and other friends of the petitioners came on the spot...
Mary Manuel vs.state & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
* IN THE HIGH CO URT O F DE L HI AT NEW DE LHI % + Judgment delivered on:30. h October 2018 CRL. REV. P. 487/2016 MARY MANUEL STATE & ORS. Versus ....... Petitioner ....... RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr.Raghuvinder Verma, APP for the State Mr.Rajeev Sirohi, Advocate for R-2 & R-3 : Ms.Bhakti Pasrija Sethi, Advocate CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGEMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J1... Petitioner impugns order dated 01.07.2016, whereby the Additional Sessions Judge held that prima-facie no charge is made out against Respondent No.2 and discharged him of all the charges. However, framed charges against Respondent No.3 for the offences punishable under section 417/376/313 IPC, while discharging him for the offences punishable under section 420/403/5IPC.2.... Petitioner filed a complaint on 25.03.2004 alleging that Respondent No.2 introduced the... Petitioner to Respondent No.3 six years ago, in the month of December 19...
M/S Associated Swichgear & Projects Ltd vs.m/s Hind Electrician
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.638/2006 % M/S ASSOCIATED SWICHGEAR & PROJECTS LTD30h October, 2018 ...... Appellant Through: Mr. Shiv Khurana, Adv. M/S HIND ELECTRICIAN versus ..... Respondent Through: None. 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 defendant in the suit impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 20.07.2006 whereby the trial court has decreed the suit for a sum of Rs. 3,45,004.12 along with interest at 12% per annum from February 1995 till the institution of the suit and thereafter at 8% per annum pendente lite and future till realisation of the decretal amount. The suit amount was claimed on account of supply of cables by the respondent/plaintiff to the appellant/defendant. RFA No.638/2006 Page 1 of 4 2. The learned counsel for the appellant/defendant only argues the appeal ...
Atul Sharma vs.deepti Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:30. h October, 2018 + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 150/2018 & C.M.26711/2018 ATUL SHARMA ..... Appellant Through: Ms.Jyoti Gupta, Advocate with appellant in person. versus DEEPTI SHARMA ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Kirat Randhawa, Advocate with respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 05.04.2018 passed by the Family Court on an application filed by the respondent under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking maintenance for herself and her minor son, who is 5 years of age. We may note that the Family Court has awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the appellant has strongly urged before this Court that the Family Court has failed to take into account that the appellant is doing panditai and is earning only Rs.6,000/- per month. It is submitted that the Famil...
Mahesh Chand vs.the State ( Gnct of Delhi) & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
........ Petitioner Judgment delivered on:30.10.2018 BAIL APPLN. 1146/2018 MAHESH CHAND $~10 & 11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + + THE STATE ( GNCT OF DELHI) & ORS THE STATE ( GNCT OF DELHI) & ORS versus BAIL APPLN. 1148/2018 KAMALDEEP versus ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Pankaj Tiwari with Mr. B.L. Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondent : Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State SI Ashish Kumar, PS Bhajanpura. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT3010.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.678/2017 under Sections 323/341/3IPC, Police Station Bhajan Pura.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the complainant along with his family were walking on the streets when the petitioners and the co- BAIL APPLN. 1146/2018 & BAIL APPLN. 1148/2018 Page 1 of 3 accused are alleged to have started beating them, consequent to which, they...
Sarvesh Kumar vs.state (Govt. Of Nct Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
$~14 (R-38 Part B) * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL. APPEAL No.22/2002 SARVESH KUMAR Decided on:-"30th October, 2018 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. U.A. Khan & Mr. Shahrukh Khan, Advs. with appellant in person. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. K.S. Ahuja, APP for the State with SI Sonu PS Seemapuri, Delhi. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA1 ORDER (ORAL) On the basis of report (charge-sheet) under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C) submitted, upon conclusion of investigation into first information report (FIR) No.62/2000 of police station Seema Puri, the appellant was put on trial in sessions case No.100/2001, on the charge for offences under Sections 366 and 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), the gravamen whereof was that on 28.02.2000 he had kidnapped the prosecutrix girl with intent to compel her for marriage and thereafter had committed rape against her during the period 28.02.2000 to 15.03.2000. By judg...
State vs.fatima
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2018
Versus STATE FATIMA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(Oral) 1. Through: ..... Respondent $~10 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:30. 10.2018 CRL.L.P. 153/2018 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Krishan Lal, P.S. Seelammpur. This petition seeks leave to impugn the judgment dated 03.11.2017, passed by the learned Special Judge (NDPS), North-East, Karkardooma Courts, Shahdara, Delhi in case FIR No.01/2015 registered under section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985, at Police Station Seelampur.2. It is the petitioners case that the impugned order is erroneous in as much as it has failed to appreciate the fact that no notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was required to be served; that in any case, after due intimation of her rights, the respondent had waived her rights apropos CRL. L.P. 153/2018 Page 1 of 4 personal search before a Gazetted Officer; the peti...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »