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.
Rajender Jaina & Another vs.kali Das Dutt
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.652/2018 and C.M. No.32213/2018(stay) + % RAJENDER JAINA & ANOTHER29h November, 2018 ..... Appellants Mr. Aggarwal, Advocate (M. No.9810179438). Rajesh Through: versus Through: Mr. S.K. Bhaduri, Advocate. (M. No.9810439195). ..... Respondent KALI DAS DUTT CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. In this appeal, a limited notice was issued on 10.08.2018 confining the issue only to the reduction of the interest on compounded basis granted in favour of the respondent/plaintiff and against the appellants/defendants. This order dated 10.08.2018 reads as under:-"CM No.32214/2018 (Exemption) RFA No.652/2018 Page 1 of 3 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. CM No.32215/2018 (delay in re-filing) 2. For the reasons stated in the application, delay in re-filing is condoned, subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. RFA No.652/2018 & CM N...
d.v. Singh vs.c.b.i.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~R-1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A472000 Decided on:29. h November, 2018 D.V. SINGH C.B.I. Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Atif Shamim, Advocate ........ Petitioner versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Narender Mann, Spl. PP with Mr. Manoj Pant, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The appellant was working as Junior Engineer in the Building Department of Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), his office being at Town Hall, Delhi in January, 1996. It was concededly part of his duty to examine and put up before the authorities, the applications for grant of sanction for building activity. Indisputably, an application in the name of Mrs. C.K. Khurana, wife of Mr. O.P. Khurana (PW-1) for sanction of building plan in respect of the property described as plot no.M-12, New Multan Nagar, Rohtak Road, New Delhi, had been submitted and the appellant was to process the same. Indisputably, O.P. Khurana (PW-1), the husband of the applica...
Ancl & Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs.punj Lloyd Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~6 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:29. 11.2018 ARB.P. 552/2018 ANCL & CO. (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Through Mr. Udit Seth, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus PUNJ LLOYD LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. vivek Jain and Mr. Manish Shekhari, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) 1 The petitioner has approached this Court on account of the learned Arbitrator recusing from the matter. This aspect is reflected in the procedural order dated 05.07.2018 passed by the learned Arbitrator. For the sake of convenience, the same is extracted below: The proceedings were listed today for the evidence of the claimant's witness Mr. Sanjeev Khokha. The witness was present. However, Ld. Counsel for the respondent sought time on the ground that Ms. Gurkamal Hora Arora, Ld. Counsel who is to conduct the cross examination of the witness is held up in several matters before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and will not be in a position to cross examine the w...
Jiya Rani @ Jiya Joshi vs.narinder Kumar Dhingra & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~J- * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of pronouncement:29. 11. 2018 C.R.P. 34/2016 & C.M. APPL. No.7288/2016 JIYA RANI @ JIYA JOSHI .......... Petitioner Through Mr.Harvinder Singh, Advocate along with petitioner in person. versus NARINDER KUMAR DHINGRA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr.J.M.Bari,Adv. with Ms.Meenakshi Bari, Adv. for R-1 to 7. Mr.M.K.Singh, Adv. for DDA/R-8 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 115 of the CPC for setting aside of the order dated 06.11.2015 passed by the trial court whereby an application filed by the petitioner/defendant No.1 under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was dismissed.2. The suit has been filed by the plaintiffs/respondents No.1 to 7 for declaration and permanent injunction. They have sought a decree of declaration declaring that the plaintiffs/respondents No.1 to 7 are the occupants under respondent No.8/defendant No.2/DDA and are not the tenants of the petitioner qua the suit p...
Kiran Kanojia vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~ 2 & 3 * % + FAO2652014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:29. h November, 2018 + UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for Railways with Mr. A.S. Dateer, Mr. Vipin Chaudhary and Mr. Preet Singh, Advocates. KIRAN KANOJIA versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Punam Kumari, Advocate FAO4032017 & CM APPL. 18772/2018 KIRAN KANOJIA UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Punam Kumari, Advocate versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for Railways with Mr. A.S. Dateer, Mr. Vipin Chaudhary and Mr. Preet Singh, Advocates. Mr.Joydeep Ms.Priyata Chakraborty, Curiae) and (Amicus Mazumdar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The parties have challenged the order dated 25th April, 2014 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- have been awarded to Kiran Kanojia. FAO2652014 & FAO4032017 Page 1 of 11 2. Kiran Kanojia, hereinafter referred to as...
Raghav Kalra vs.state Thr. Cbi
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...
Ram Narayan Institute of Education vs.national Council for Teacher Edu ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9791/2018 Date of decision:29. h November, 2018 RAM NARAYAN INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION ...... Petitioner Through Mr.Mayank Manish and Mr. Ravi Kant, Advs. versus NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Adv. for R-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) It has already been noted, in this case, in the order dated 17th % 1. September, 2018, that the petitioner limits his relief to a direction to the Appellate Committee of the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) to decide his appeal as expeditiously as possible.2. Mr. Naresh Kaushik, appearing on behalf of the NCTE, submits that the appeal has been filed online and the petitioner would be required to submit a hard copy thereof along with annexures to the appeal, in order that appeal be decided.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to do the needful within one week. W.P.(C) 9791/2018 Page 1 o...
Union of India vs.kiran Kanojia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~ 2 & 3 * % + FAO2652014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:29. h November, 2018 + UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for Railways with Mr. A.S. Dateer, Mr. Vipin Chaudhary and Mr. Preet Singh, Advocates. KIRAN KANOJIA versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Punam Kumari, Advocate FAO4032017 & CM APPL. 18772/2018 KIRAN KANOJIA UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Punam Kumari, Advocate versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for Railways with Mr. A.S. Dateer, Mr. Vipin Chaudhary and Mr. Preet Singh, Advocates. Mr.Joydeep Ms.Priyata Chakraborty, Curiae) and (Amicus Mazumdar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The parties have challenged the order dated 25th April, 2014 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- have been awarded to Kiran Kanojia. FAO2652014 & FAO4032017 Page 1 of 11 2. Kiran Kanojia, hereinafter referred to as...
Vijay Kumar & Ors. Vs.the State (Nct of Delhi ) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~15 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"29th November, 2018 CRL. M.C. 4212/2015 VIJAY KUMAR & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Vijay Khanna, Adv. versus + THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI ) & ANR. Through: ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with SI Hem Karan, PS Bhalswa Dairy. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The second respondent was married to the petitioner as per Hindu rites and ceremonies on 02.03.2006. Out of their cohabitation, two children took birth, both daughters on 28.10.2008 and 11.10.2011 respectively. On 29.09.2013, the second respondent lodged first information report (FIR) No.282/2013 with police station Bhalaswa Dairy, for the offences under Section 498A/4of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) against her husband (the first petitioner), his father (the second petitioner), his mother (the third petitioner), his sister (the fourth petitioner), and husband of the said sister (fifth petitioner) besides his maternal uncle ...
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -2 vs.cincom Systems India Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-2018
$~ 2 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA3652018 Date of decision:29. h November, 2018 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2..... Appellant Through: Mr.Asheesh Jain, Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department versus CINCOM SYSTEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Kislaya Parashar and Mr.Umang Luthra, Advocates for the respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): Present appeal under Section 260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act" for short) in the case of M/s. Cincom Systems India Pvt. Ltd. is directed against the order dated 16th June, 2017 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal' for short) and pertains to the assessment year 2008-09.2. The respondent-assessee, a company, was engaged in twin business of development and support of computer software of the parent company; and import and marketing of computer software and supplying the same to the end user. For the ass...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »