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.
Dsc Ltd. Vs.dada Jeetu Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-16-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on:15. h October, 2018 Judgment Delivered on:16. h November, 2018 + CRL.M.C. 4227/2014 & Crl.M.A.14611/2014 DSC LTD. versus DADA JEETU BUILDCON PVT LTD ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Rajnish Kumar, Advocate. For the... RESPONDENTS : Ms. Priya Hingorani with Mr. Parveen Kumar, Advocates. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.1. The petitioner seeks quashing of summoning order dated 06.03.2013 and seeks quashing of complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the N.I. Act).2. The respondent had filed a complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act contending that two cheques in the sum of Rs. 75 lakhs issued by the petitioner were dishonoured for the reasons insufficient funds.3. Apart from the raising defence on merits, the petitioner has raised a technical defence to the complaint a...
Sunny Nagar vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-16-2018
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:16. 11.2018 BAIL APPLN. 1774/2018 SUNNY NAGAR STATE versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Jain and Ms. Sakshi Arora, Advocates For the Respondent: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State with SI Amit Bhardwaj CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1611.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.282/2018 under Sections 452/323/341/4of the IPG, Police Station Ghazipur, New Delhi.2. The allegations in the FIR against the petitioners are that the co- accused had entered into the office of the complainant and had an altercation with the complainant and his brother and assaulted them with sticks. The petitioner is alleged to have also entered into the office and assaulted the complainant and his brother with sticks.3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been false...
Narcotics Control Bureau vs.athar Pervez & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-16-2018
$~8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"16th November, 2018 + CRL.M.C. 1644/2015 and Crl. M.A. 5995/2015 (stay) NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhir Kumar for Mr. Rajesh Manchanda, Advocate versus ATHAR PERVEZ & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Yogesh Saxena, Advocate for R-1, 2 & 4 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. On the complaint (SC2513) of the petitioner Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) respondents are facing criminal prosecution in the court of the Special Judge (NDPS) on the accusations of they having committed offences punishable under Section 9-A read with Sections 25-A / 25/and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), the case primarily being founded on recoveries statedly made on 22.08.2013 of 30 kilograms of pseudoephedrine and 2.5 kg of Methaqualone followed by another recovery of 24.700 kgs of Methaqualone. The samples of the substance recovered had been sent by the NCB, ...
Renu Barrot vs.mridula Pant & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-16-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: November 16, 2018 CONT.CAS(C) 288/2017 RENU BARROT ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi & Ms. Anamika Niyazi, Advocates Versus MRIDULA PANT & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ankur Chibber, Advocate ORDER (ORAL) C.M. 25009/2017 There is delay of two months in filing the additional affidavit. For the reasons stated in the application, delay is condoned and the additional affidavit filed by petitioner is taken on record. Application is disposed of. C.M. 4073/2018 There is delay of 06 days in filing the copy of writ petition in pursuance to order of 18th July, 2017. For the reasons stated in the application, delay is condoned and copy of writ petition is taken on record. Application is disposed of. CONT.CAS(C) 288/2017 Vide order of 27th April, 2015 (Annexure P-10), respondent-School CONT.CAS(C) 2Page 1 of 4 was directed to regularize petitioner on the post which petitioner was h...
Philips Electronics India Ltd vs.uoi Thr Director General of Health Se ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-16-2018
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:16. h November, 2018 + O.M.P. 92/2008 PHILIPS ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Ankit Virmani & Ms. Rinkel Singh, Advocates (M-9727270803). versus UOI THR DIRECTOR GENERAL OF HEALTH SERVICES & ANR. Through: Mr. R.V. Sinha & Mr. A.S. Singh, ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates (M-9868230464). CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) The... Petitioner has challenged the impugned award dated 16th 1. November, 2007 by which the Ld. Arbitrator awarded liquidated damages and adjusted the same towards the 50% agents commission which was to be paid.2. The brief background is that a notice inviting tender was called on 10th October, 1993 by the Director General of Health Services (DGHS), Ministry of Health for supply and installing Cardiac Catheterisation at JIPMER, Puduchery. The... Petitioner Philips Medical Systems India Pvt. Ltd., now known as Philips India Ltd. quoted a price of NLG1412,825, ...
Narender @ Bhola vs.the State Govt of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-15-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ARIF Reserved on:5. h July, 2018 Decided on:15. h November, 2018 CRL.A. 927/2017 Represented by: Mr. M.R. Chanchal, Advocate. ..... Appellant versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP + WAHID for the State CRL.A. 1015/2017 Represented by: Mr. Prashant Diwan with Mr. Brajesh Dwivedi, Advocates. ..... Appellant versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP + ANSHU for the State CRL.A. 1132/2017 ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Sandesh Singh Bagga, versus Advocate. THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP + CRL.A. 5/2018 for the State NARENDER @ BHOLA ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.V.K. Mishra, Advocate. versus CRL.A. 927/2017, 1015/2017, 1132/2017 &5/2018 Page 1 of 12 THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'B...
Rakesh Singh vs.state ( Govt. Of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-15-2018
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:15. 11.2018 BAIL APPLN. 1853/2018 RAKESH SINGH versus ........ Petitioner STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Ms. Anushree Kapadia with Mr. Ajeet Kumar Singh, Advocates. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State JUDGMENT1511.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.61/2018 under Sections 379/394/397/411/120-B IPC, Police Station Jama Masjid.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the complainant along with the driver of his employer was taking the goods worth approximately Rs.15 lakhs in a van for delivery to the factory. On the way, an altercation took place with three boys, who were driving an Eeco Car and after the altercation was over when the boys left, the complainant and the driver found that the backdoor of the van was open and later on i...
Mann @ Manjusha Yadav vs.state & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-15-2018
#13 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:15. h November, 2018 W.P.(CRL.) 3451/2018 & Crl. MA No.36002/2018 (under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for interim directions) MANN @ MANJUSHA YADAV ........ Petitioner versus STATE & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Ms. Amritananda Chakravorty, Mr. Mihir Samson and Ms. Shreya Munoth, Advocates with petitioner in person. For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel (Crl.) along with Mr. Chaitanya Gosain, Advocate. Inspector Davendra Singh, P.S. Jagat Puri. Mr. Mitthan Lal, Advocate for respondent No.5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been instituted by the petitioner, namely, Mann @ Manjusha Yadav, aged approximately 36 years and statedly a friend of Ms. Princy Verma, pray...
Dr. A S Rathore vs.vimal Jain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-15-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:15. h November, 2018 CRL.L.P. 459/2016 ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Atanu Saikia, Advocate. DR. A S RATHORE VIMAL JAIN CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) versus Represented by: Mr. Surender Tyagi, Advocate ..... Respondent Crl.M.A. No.13545/2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner erroneously filed a revision petition against the order of acquittal which has resulted in delay in filing the leave to appeal petition. Considering the fact stated in the application delay of 1627 days in filing the leave to appeal is condoned. Application is disposed of. CRL.L.P. 459/2016 1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 2nd November 2011, whereby the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, the petitioner/complainant has preferred the present leave petition.2. Facts of the case as ...
Voith Hydro Private Limited vs.madhya Bharat Power Corporation Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-15-2018
$~27 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:15. 11.2018 + O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 341/2018 VOITH HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Omar Ahmad, Mr. Vikram Shah and Mr. Ishan Gaur, Advs. versus MADHYA BHARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED Through Mr. Ratan K. Singh and Ms. Priyanka ..... Respondent Solanki, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) I.A. 15545/2018 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 341/2018 2. This is a joint petition moved on behalf of the parties herein for seeking extension of time.3. I am informed that the Arbitral Tribunal entered upon reference on 15.5.2017 and that, after the expiry of the statutory period of twelve (12) months parties mutually agreed for extension of time by six (6) months. 3.1 That extension was triggered on 21.3.2018. 3.2 Evidently, the extended time is coming to an end today, i.e. 15.11.2018. O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 341/2018 Page 1 of 2 4. In these circumstan...
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- Next ›
- Last »