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.
Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited vs.systopic Laboratories Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2018
$~5 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 442/2018 & IA No.15114/2018 (u/O XIV R-5 CPC) SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Hemant Singh and Mr. Vaseem Shuaib Ahmed, Advs. Versus SYSTOPIC LABORATORIES LIMITED ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Aasish Somasi and Ms. Imon CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW Roy, Advs. ORDER0111.2018 This order is in continuation of the earlier order dated 22nd October, % 1.2018. 2. The counsel for the plaintiff states that the plaintiff will be prejudiced by disposal of the suit in the manner suggested on 22nd October, 2018 and desires to keep the suit adjourned sine die.3. The plaintiff has also filed IA No.15114/2018 under Order XIV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) which has come up today for the first time.4. The counsel for the defendant states that a reply be permitted to be filed thereto.5. Considering the nature of the application, reply is not deemed necessary and the counsels hav...
Reliance Infrastructure Limited vs.bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2018
$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:01. 11.2018 + O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 326/2018 RELIANCE INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED Through Mr. Aditya Panda, Adv. ........ Petitioner Versus BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Kartik Nayar and Mr. Sarthak Malhotra, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) I.A. 15066/2018 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 326/2018 2.3. Issue notice. Mr. Nayar accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. Learned counsel says that he does not wish to file a reply as he does not oppose the prayer made in the application for extension of time for concluding the arbitration proceedings.4. The record shows that after nominee Arbitrators were appointed by the parties herein, the nominee Arbitrators in turn vide letter dated 29.3.2017 appointed the Presiding Arbitrator.5. The record also shows that on 8.9.2017 the Arbitral Tribunal extended, with mutual consent of the partie...
Raj Kumar @ Suman vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 602/2003 RAJINDER KUMAR @ GANJA Through: Mr. Anupam Reserved on:16. h October, 2018 Decided on:1. t November, 2018 .....Appellant S.Sharma with Mr.Prakash Airan, Advocates. STATE versus .....Respondent Through: Mr.Hirein Sharma, APP for State. + CRL.A. 32/2004 RAJ KUMAR @ SUMAN .....Appellant Through: Mr.Sumeet Verma with Ms.Preeti Jakhar, Advocates. STATE versus .....Respondent Through: Mr.Hirein Sharma, APP for State. + JAGDISH @ JAGGI STATE OF DELHI .....Appellant CRL.A. 920/2015 Through: Mr.Anupam S.Sharma with versus Mr.Prakash Airan, Advocates. Through: Mr.Hirein Sharma, APP for State. .....Respondent Crl.A.602/2003 & connected appeals Page 1 of 36 CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VINOD GOEL Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: JUDGMENT1 These are three appeals arising out of the same set of facts. Crl.A.602 of 2003 is by Rajinder Kumar @ Ganja (A-3) and Crl.A.32 of 2004 is by Raj Kumar @ Suman (Accused No.2: A-2) directed against the j...
Mcd vs.m/s. Harcharan Dass Gupta Construction Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2018
$~J- * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on:01. 11. 2018 O.M.P. 424/2007 MCD + Through Mr.V.Gangotra, Advocate for MCD. versus ........ Petitioner M/S. HARCHARAN DASS GUPTA CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. .... Respondent Through Mr.Harish Malhotra, Sr. Adv. with Mr.V.K.Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. This petition is filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996(hereinafter referred to as the Arbitration Act) seeking to impugn the award dated 09.03.2007 passed by the learned sole arbitrator.2. The respondent herein had instituted two separate proceedings, i.e. invoked the arbitration clause pursuant to the agreement dated 16.04.1998 and also instituted a suit being CS(OS) 607/2003. The said suit pertains to the levy of compensation imposed upon the respondent Sh.Harcharan Dass Gupta Construction Pvt. Ltd. (vide letter dated 02.01.2003). Vide a separate judgment today, I have decided the suit filed by the re...
Ajay Sharma & Anr vs.manu Markande
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2018
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on : October 15, 2018 Judgment pronounced on: November 01, 2018 FAO(OS) 114/2016 AND CM APPL. 13061/2016 AJAY SHARMA & ANR ..... Appellants Through Mr. Rajat Aneja and Ms. Chandrika Gupta, Advs. versus MANU MARKANDE Through Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh and Ms.Savita, Advs. for R-2 & R-5. ..... Respondent FAO(OS) 190/2016 MANU MARKANDE AND ANR ..... Appellants Through Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh and Ms.Savita, Advs. versus STATE & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Rajat Aneja and Ms. Chandrika Gupta, Advs. for R-3 & R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA JUDGMENT A.K. CHAWLA, J.These two appeals impugn the order dated 14.01.2016 1. passed by the learned Single Judge, partly allowing an application (IA No.21049/2014) seeking amendments in the FAO (OS) (COMM) 114/2016 & 190/2016 Page 1 of 11 reply/objections (written statement) filed Ajay Sharma, (appellant in FAO(OS) No.114/2016, hereaft...
Vascular Therapeutics India Pvt. Ltd. Vs.india Medronic Private Limite ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2018
$-11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:1. t November, 2018 + ARB.P. 777/2018 VASCULAR THERAPEUTICS INDIA PVT. LTD. ......... Petitioner Through: Mr.Sandeep Narain, Ms.Asha Goplan Nair, Ms.Ashwarya Gopakumar and Ms.Nivedita Nair, Advs. versus INDIA MEDRONIC PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR Through: Mr.Suhail Dutt, Sr. Adv.with ......... RESPONDENTS Mr.Rajiv Mohan Brahma, Mr.Kushagra Sah and Mr.Azhar Alam, Advs. for R-1. Mr.A.S. Mathur, Ms.Priya Singh, Ms.Sweta Singh and Ms.Deepabali Datta, Advs. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA NAVIN CHAWLA, J.(Oral) 1. This petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been filed by the petitioner praying for a direction to the respondent no.2 to appoint an Arbitral Tribunal in accordance with the Arbitration Agreement as contained in Clause 15.2 of the Distribution Agreement dated Arb. P. No.777/2018 Page 1 17.11.2014 executed between the petitioner and Co...
Anoop Kumar vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:23. 10.2018 Date of Decision:01. 11.2018 + Crl.M.C. No.5336/2014 ANOOP KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Vinay Jaidka, Adv. versus STATE & ANR. Through Mr.Mukesh Kumar, APP. ........ RESPONDENTS Mr.Parmod Kr.Sharma with Mr.Manish Kr.Sharma, Advs for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI REKHA PALLI, J1 By this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 13.08.2014, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohini Courts, dismissing Criminal Revision Petition No.63/2013 filed by the petitioner for laying challenge to the order dated 13.09.2013 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, whereunder the petitioners application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was rejected and he was further declined any opportunity to lead pre-summoning evidence.2. A brief statement of the relevant facts is considered necessary. It is the petitioners case that the respondent no.2 by claiming to...
Focus Energy Limited vs.reebok International Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :11. h September, 2018 Date of decision :1st November, 2018 O.M.P. 214/2010 & I.A. 16732/2011 FOCUS ENERGY LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prashant Mishra, Ms. Jomol Joy, Ms. Bani Brar and Mr. Siddharth Nath, (Mob.9717068176) versus REEBOK INTERNATIONAL LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Joy Basu, Senior Advocate and Mr. Joy Roy, Ms. Smarika Singh, Mr. Anand Raja, Mr. Shantanu Tyagi, Advocates.(Mob.9810098332) + FOCUS ENERGY LIMITED O.M.P. 716/2011 ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prashant Mishra, Ms. Jomol Joy, Ms. Bani Brar and Mr. Siddharth Nath, (Mob.9717068176) versus REEBOK INTERNATIONAL LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Joy Basu, Senior Advocate and Mr. Joy Roy, Ms. Smarika Singh, Mr. Anand Raja, Mr. Shantanu Tyagi, Advocates.(Mob.9810098332) CORAM: JUST...
Amrit Jal Ventures Private Limited vs.ifci Venture Capital Fund Limite ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2018
$~OS-5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:01. 11.2018 + CS(COMM) 774/2017 AMRIT JAL VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED Through Mr.Rahul Malhotra, Adv. ..... Plaintiff Versus IFCI VENTURE CAPITAL FUND LIMITED. .... Defendant Through Mr.P.C.Sen, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Nitin Dahiya and Mr.Kaustubh Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) IA No.10482/2018 1. This application is filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the plaint.2. The plaintiff has filed the present suit seeking a decree of declaration declaring that all the amount due and payable by the plaintiff to the defendant under the Corporate Loan Agreement dated 28.03.20014 have been recovered in full by the defendant. A decree of permanent injunction is also sought restraining the defendant from transferring the securities provided by the plaintiff under the Corporate Loan Agreement dated 28.03.2014 to Green India Venture Fund including a mandatory injunction directing the defen...
Somnath vs.state Through Cbi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2018
$~R-28 & 29 (common order) IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 535/1999 Decided on:-"1st November, 2018 MUKESH KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. M.L.Yadav, Advocate with Mr. Manav Puri, Advocate STATE versus Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, Special PP ..... Respondent + CRL.A. 536/1999 with Mr. Philomon Kani, & Ms. Kriti Handa, Advocates SOMNATH Through: Mr. M.L.Yadav, Advocate with ..... Appellant Mr. Manav Puri, Advocate versus STATE THROUGH CBI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, Special PP with Mr. Philomon Kani, & Ms. Kriti Handa, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. Both the appellants stood trial, separately, on the charge for the offence punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS), on the basis of two separate reports (Sessions case Nos.13/1997 and 14/1997) arising out of first information report (FIR) of Central Bureau of Investigation Crl. Appeal No.535/1999 & 536/1999 Page 1 of 8...
- ‹ Prev
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 59
- Next ›
- Last »