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.
Employee State Insurance Corporation vs.radha Krishan Prakashan Pvt Lt ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment:30. 11.2018 F.A.O. No.152/2017 EMPLOYEE STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION ..... Appellant Through: Mr. K.P. Mavi, Mr. Bhudev Prashad Mishra & Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advs. Versus RADHA KRISHAN PRAKASHAN PVT LTD ....Respondent Through: Mr. Pravin Sharma, Ms. Kanika Sharma & Mr. Prannav Sharma, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL VINOD GOEL, J.(ORAL) C.M. No.13293/2017 (for delay) For the reasons justified in the application, the delay of 54 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The application is disposed of. F.A.O. No.152/2017 1. The impugned order dated 08.12.2016 passed by the court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi (SCJ)/ESI court in old ESIC No.(new ESIC No.76/2016) allowing the petition of the respondent company under FAO No.152/2017 Page 1 of 6 Section 75 (1) (g) of Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (ESI Act) declaring the notice of demand dated 08.05.2003 issued by the appell...
Pranamika Nair vs.girish Kumar Gangadharan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2018
$~25 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:30. h November, 2018 + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 310/2018 PRANAMIKA NAIR versus ..... Appellant Through: Appellant in person GIRISH KUMAR GANGADHARAN Through: Mr. Prashant Mendiratta, Adv. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM No.49991/2018 (Delay in re-filing) This is an application filed by the appellant seeking condonation of 26 days delay in re-filing the appeal. Delay is condoned. The application stands allowed. CM No.49990/2018 Notice. Mr. Mendirata, learned counsel for the respondent accepts notice. Although, we do not see sufficient ground to condone the delay, having regard to the fact that this is a family matter and pertains to custody of child, to meet the ends of justice, we condone the delay. Application stands disposed of accordingly. MAT.APP (F.C.) 310/2018 Page 1 of 3 MAT.APP.(F.C.) 310/2018 The challenge in this appeal is to order dated 0...
Noor Hasan vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~3 & 4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + + Judgment delivered on:29. 11.2018 BAIL APPLN. 2061/2017 NOOR HASAN versus STATE BAIL APPLN. 2063/2017 SHAN MOHAMMAD STATE versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr.J.S.Arya, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State. SI Naveen Dahiya, P.S.South Avenue. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2911.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.31/2017, under Sections 419/420468/120B read with Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, P.S.South Avenue.2. Allegations against the petitioners are that petitioners had assured the complainant for securing Government jobs against consideration.... Petitioners are alleged to have taken a total sum of Rs.6 lakhs from the BAIL APPLN. 2061/2017 & 2063/2017 Page 1 of 2 complainant and his associates.3. The parties h...
Sew Infrastructure Ltd & Anr vs.state of Nct of Delhi & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~41 to 45 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + + + Decided on:29. h November, 2018 CRL.M.C. 6032/2018 & Crl.M.A. 48331-33/2018 SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LTD & ANR ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Mohit Mathur, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jitendra Kr. Jha, Adv. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ....... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State. CRL.M.C. 6033/2018 & Crl.M.A. 48334-36/2018 SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Mohit Mathur, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jitendra Kr. Jha, Adv. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State. CRL.M.C. 6034/2018 & Crl.M.A. 48337-39/2018 SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LTD & ANR ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Mohit Mathur, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jitendra Kr. Jha, Adv. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State. Crl. M.C. No.6032/2018 & conn. Page 1 of 5 + + CRL.M.C. 6035/2018 & Crl.M.A. 48340-42/2018 SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LTD & A...
Prashant Kumar Umrao vs.state & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~19 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:29. h November, 2018 + CRL.M.C. 1096/2016 and Crl.M.A.4697/2016 PRASHANT KUMAR UMRAO ........ Petitioner Through: Ms. Roopam proxy counsel for Mr. R.P.Luthra, Advocate versus STATE & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Rahul Mehra, standing counsel with Mr. K.S. Ahuja, APP for the State with Insp. Bhushan Azad, SI Yogesh Kumar & Mr. Chaitanya Gosain, Mr. Jamal Akhtar & Mr. Tushar Sannu, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The third respondent had approached this court for certain reliefs vis--vis the case arising out of FIR No.110/2016 of Police Station Vasant Kunj North, involving offences punishable under Sections 124-A/120-B/34/147/149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) by Writ Petition (Crl.) No.558/2016. A learned Single Judge of this court, by order dated 02.03.2016, admitted the said party to interim bail, subject to certain conditions. Three petitions came to be filed in the wake of the said order, i...
Soumya Singh @ Dr. Manju vs.state Through c.b.i
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~13, 11, 12 & 46 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:29. h November, 2018 + CRL.REV.P. 726/2014 and Crl. M.A. 18454/2014 RAGHAV KALRA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Khalila Ansari and Mohammad Akhtar, Advocates versus STATE THR. CBI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, SPP with Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocate + CRL.M.C. 912/2015 and Crl. M.A. 3454/2015 Dr. DEEPTI MANGALA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. S.S. Kulshreshtra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A.S. Kulshreshtra, Mr. Ajeet Pandey, Mr. Lalit Kumar and Mr. K.K. Sharma, Advocates versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION .... Respondent Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, SPP + CRL.M.C. 717/2018 and Crl. M.A. 2573/2018 DR KANIKA GUPTA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Harsh Khanna, Mr. Sandeep Khanna and Ms. Aakashi Lodha, Advocates versus Crl.RP7262014 & connected Page 1 of 11 CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, SPP with Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advo...
Affinity Beauty Salon Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs.kotak Mahindra Bank Limited ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision :29th November, 2018 + CS (COMM) 1251/2018 & I.A. 16098/2018 AFFINITY BEAUTY SALON PVT. LTD. & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Akhil Sibal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tushar John, Mr. Parinay T. Vasandoni, Mr. Abhinav Hansaria and Mr. Somesh Shukla, Advocates. (M:8800424159) versus KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Ms. Jagriti Ahuja, Advocate for D-1. (M:9213743613) Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Gaurav Varma and Mr. Kaustubh Prakash, Advocates for D (M:9654793136) CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) 1. The present suit for permanent injunction has been filed by Affinity Beauty Salon Pvt. Ltd. and Mr. Vishal Sharma (hereinafter Plaintiffs) against Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited- Defendant No.1 (hereinafter Bank) and Wella India Private Limited (hereinafter Defendant). The reliefs sought in the present suit are as under: a. Pass a decree of permanent injunction ...
3r Technologies vs.u.o.i. And Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 963/2018 3R TECHNOLOGIES Date of Decision: November 29, 2018 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Akhilesh Singh, Advocate versus U.O.I. AND ANR. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC with Ms. Sakshi Agrawal, Mr. Waaiz Ali Noor and Mr. Prateek Danda, Advocates for UOI Mr. Ankur Mishra, Mr. Rahul Singhal, Advocates for respondent No.2 (Contonment Board). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN % S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(ORAL) ORDER2911.2018 1. What the petitioner seeks in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution is a direction that it be permitted to bid in the tender issued by the second respondent (hereinafter referred to as the Board) for design, supply, installation and construction including operation and maintenance of STP (Sewage Treatment Plant) of capacity 1.0 MLD under Swachh Bharat Mission. W.P. (C) No.963/2018 Page 1 of 7 2. Facts of this case are that the tender w...
Shiv Mangal Rai vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
p$~8 & 9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + + + Date of Decision: November 29, 2018 W.P.(C) 11919/2016 SHIV MANGAL RAI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Puneet Taneja, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Arti Bansal, Advocate. W.P.(C) 11936/2016 BASISTHA NARAYAN CHAUDHARY Through: Mr. Punjeet Taneja, Advocate. ........ Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Arti Bansal, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.CHAWLA A.K.CHAWLA, J.(ORAL) Two senior Indian nationals, now aged about 70 years, are once again 1. before this Court by way of writ petitions viz. W.P.(C) 11919/2016, Shiv Mangal Rai vs. Union of India & ors and WP(C) 11936/2016, Basistha W.P.(C.) Nos. 11919/2016 & 11936/2016 Page 1 of 12 Narayan Chaudhary vs. Union of India and ors. They seek issuance of the writs of certiorari and mandamus to the respondents for being released the pensionary benefits having served...
Dr. Deepti Mangala vs.central Bureau of Investigation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~13, 11, 12 & 46 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:29. h November, 2018 + CRL.REV.P. 726/2014 and Crl. M.A. 18454/2014 RAGHAV KALRA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Khalila Ansari and Mohammad Akhtar, Advocates versus STATE THR. CBI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, SPP with Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocate + CRL.M.C. 912/2015 and Crl. M.A. 3454/2015 Dr. DEEPTI MANGALA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. S.S. Kulshreshtra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A.S. Kulshreshtra, Mr. Ajeet Pandey, Mr. Lalit Kumar and Mr. K.K. Sharma, Advocates versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION .... Respondent Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, SPP + CRL.M.C. 717/2018 and Crl. M.A. 2573/2018 DR KANIKA GUPTA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Harsh Khanna, Mr. Sandeep Khanna and Ms. Aakashi Lodha, Advocates versus Crl.RP7262014 & connected Page 1 of 11 CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, SPP with Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »