Delhi Court November 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.
Sajan Kumar vs.the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:30. 11.2018 BAIL APPLN. 2179/2018 SAJAN KUMAR versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : Mr. Yogesh Rathee, Advocate. Mr. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT3011.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.159/2018 under Sections 354/376/506(ii) IPC, Police Station Moti Nagar.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the complainant was working in a factory and the petitioner was also a co-worker in the factory. It is alleged that he used to misbehave with her and approximately one month prior to lodging of the complaint he had committed the offence of rape on her and made a video and thereafter he is alleged to have used the video to repeat the offence. BAIL APPLN. 2179/2018 Page 1 of 3 3. Status report has been filed, which not...
Ramo Industries Pte. Ltd. Vs.punj Lloyd Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
$~39 & 40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:30. 11.2018 + ARB. A. (COMM.) 50/2018 & I.A. No.13454/2018 RAMO INDUSTRIES PTE. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ritin Rai with Mr. Rohan Dhariwal, Advs. versus PUNJ LLOYD LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dayan Krishanan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vivek Jain and Mr. Manish, Advs. + ARB. A. (COMM.) 51/2018 & I.A. No.13456/2018 1. RAMO INDUSTRIES SDN. BHD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ritin Rai with Mr. Rohan Dhariwal, Advs. versus PUNJ LLOYD LTD. Dayan Krishanan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vivek Jain and Mr. Manish, Advs. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.2. Mr. Dayan Krishanan, learned Senior Counsel, who, appears for the respondent, concedes that the impugned order dated 28.7.2018 is, in effect, ARB. A. (COMM.) 50/2018 & 51/2018 Pg. 1 of 3 an order injuncting the respondent from enforcing its claim against a non-...
Sandeep Kohli vs.additional Director of Income Tax (Inv)-Unit Vi and A ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.5937/2016 Reserved on :10. h May, 2018 Date of decision:30. h November, 2018 SHAH E NAAZ JUDGE ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Satyen Sethi, Mr. Arta Trana Panda & Ms. Gargee Sethi, Advocates. versus ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV)-UNIT VI AND ANOTHER ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Ashok K. Manchanda, Sr. Standing Counsel. WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.11842/2016 SAHYR KOHLI ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Satyen Sethi, Mr. Arta Trana Panda & Ms. Gargee Sethi, Advocates. versus ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV)-UNIT VI AND ANOTHER ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Ashok K. Manchanda, Sr. Standing Counsel. WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.11843/2016 SANDEEP KOHLI ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Satyen Sethi, Mr. Arta Trana Panda & Ms. Gargee Sethi, Advocates. versus ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV)-UNIT VI AND ANOTHER ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Ashok K. Manchanda, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE ...
Suresh Chandra vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:30. h November, 2018 ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. Anurag Rawat, Advocate. $~12 * + W.P.(C) 10002/2016 SURESH CHANDRA versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Ms.Monika Arora, Standing Counsel for JNU with Mr.Harsh Ahuja, Mr.Kushal Kumar, Advocates for R2, 3/JNU. Mr. Manjeet Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr.Tarjit Singh, Advocate for R4. Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocate for R5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Vide the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby directing the respondents to cancel the appointment of respondent No.4/Dr. Ajmer Singh Kajal on the post of Professor (Post No.35) (Backlog reserved category) in the centre of Indian Languages, School of Language, Literature and Culture Studies, JNU, New Delhi.2. Further seeks direction to direct the concerned respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Professor in the centre of mentioned above.3....
Nitin Kumar Sood @ Sumit vs.the State ( Govt. Of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:30. 11.2018 BAIL APPLN. 1890/2018 NITIN KUMAR SOOD @ SUMIT ........ Petitioner versus THE STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI)..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : Mr.Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate. Mr.Hirein Sharma, APP with SI Sanjay Singh, P.S.Ambedkar Nagar. Mr.Rajeev Ranjan Pandey, Adv. for the complainant. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT3011.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.277/2018 under Sections 324/3IPC. Subsequently, Section 354B and 326 has also been added.2. Subject FIR has been registered consequent to a quarrel that took place between the two neighbouring families. It is alleged that the petitioners family was abusing the family of the complainant when the family of the complainant objected, they started assaulting BAIL APPLN. 1890/2018 Page 1 of 3 them. When the complainant came on t...
Sahyr Kohli vs.additional Director of Income Tax (Inv)-Unit Vi and Ano ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.5937/2016 Reserved on :10. h May, 2018 Date of decision:30. h November, 2018 SHAH E NAAZ JUDGE ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Satyen Sethi, Mr. Arta Trana Panda & Ms. Gargee Sethi, Advocates. versus ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV)-UNIT VI AND ANOTHER ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Ashok K. Manchanda, Sr. Standing Counsel. WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.11842/2016 SAHYR KOHLI ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Satyen Sethi, Mr. Arta Trana Panda & Ms. Gargee Sethi, Advocates. versus ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV)-UNIT VI AND ANOTHER ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Ashok K. Manchanda, Sr. Standing Counsel. WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.11843/2016 SANDEEP KOHLI ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Satyen Sethi, Mr. Arta Trana Panda & Ms. Gargee Sethi, Advocates. versus ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV)-UNIT VI AND ANOTHER ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Ashok K. Manchanda, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE ...
Inder vs.state ( Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
$~7 & 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:30. 11.2018 BAIL APPLN. 780/2018 ROHIT versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) + BAIL APPLN. 1042/2018 INDER versus STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent: Mr. L.S. Saini and Mr. Lalit Saini, Advs. Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State with SI Anita CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT3011.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.56/2018 under Sections 354/354-B/354-D/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station Chandni Mahal, Delhi. Section 8 of the POCSO Act was also added in respect of petitioner/applicant Inder. BAIL APPLN. 780/2018 & 1042/2018 Page 1 of 3 2. The allegations are that the petitioners are neighbours and that they misbehaved with the complainant and her daughter.3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners...
Vipin Sharma & Ors. Vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved On:30. 10.2018 Judgment Pronounced On:30. 11.2018 CRL. A. 709/2018, Crl.M. (Bail) Nos.1076-78/2018 VIPIN SHARMA & ORS. ..... Appellants Through Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocate Versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP Insp. Pramod Kumar SHO/Krishna Nagar CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J1 The present appeal under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C') assails the judgment and order of conviction and order on sentence dated 24.04.2018 and 08.05.2018 Crl. A. 709/2018 Page 1 of 37 respectively, in Sessions Case No.497/2016, titled as 'State vs. Mahadev Rawat and Ors.', emanating from FIR No.90/2011 (hereinafter referred to as the 'subject FIR').2. By way of the impugned judgment and order of conviction and order on sentence dated 24.04.2018 and 08.05....
Matayi Foods Ltd. Vs.white Feathers Restaurants Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
$~4 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:30. 11.2018 ARB.P. 447/2018 MATAYI FOODS LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Alok Singh with Mr. Deepak versus Shukla, Advocates. WHITE FEATHERS RESTAURANTS PVT. LTD. Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) ..... Respondent 1. This is a petition filed under Section 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short 1996 Act) for appointment of an Arbitrator in the disputes obtaining between the parties herein. Notice in this petition was issued on 01.06.2018. Notice was made returnable on 23.08.2018. On that date there was no representation either on behalf of the petitioner or the respondent. Today, though, the petitioner is represented by a counsel, there is no representation on behalf of the respondent.2. Broadly, the facts which are required to be noticed in order to adjudicate upon this petition are as follows:3. It appears that the respondent company obt...
Abhishek Sharma & Anr. Vs.jyoti Makhija
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.966/2018 % ABHISHEK SHARMA & ANR. 30th November, 2018 ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Vijay Sharma and Mr. Anuj Pal, Advocates (Mobile No.9811368656). versus JYOTI MAKHIJA ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. No.49860/2018 (for exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. RFA No.966/2018 and C.M. Appl. No.49859/2018 (for stay) 2. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendants in the suit RFA No.966/2018 Page 1 of 22 impugning the Judgment of the trial court dated 21.08.2018 by which the trial court has decreed the suit for possession, recovery of arrears of rent and permanent injunction filed by the respondent/plaintiff against the appellants/defendants. As per the plaint, the appellant No.1/defendant No.1 was a tenant of the responden...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »