Delhi Court December 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.
Gyan Prakash & Anr. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2018
* + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: December 19, 2018 CRL.M.C. 6509/2018 & CRL.M.As. 50227-28/2018 GYAN PRAKASH & ANR. Through: Ms.Nalim Tripathi, Advocate .....Petitioners STATE & ANR. Versus Through: Mr. Manjeet Singh Oberoi, .....Respondents Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SHO Kuldeep Singh, SI Sunil Kumar and SI Manoj Kumar Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.350/2018, under Sections 323/341/356/379/ 5of IPC, registered at police station Govind Puri, Delhi is sought on the basis of Compromise Deed of 10th December, 2018 (Annexure P-2).2. Mr. Manjeet Singh Oberoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, has been identified to be the complainant party/Injured of FIR in question by Investigating Officer-Sunil Kumar on the basis of identity proof produced by him.3. Respondent No.2, present i...
Anil Modi vs.prabhat Kumar & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2018
$~10 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.R.P. 226/2018 & C.M. No.42946/2018 (for stay) ANIL MODI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Mukul Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Tushar Gupta, Ms. Nitya Gupta & Mr. Sumit Mishra, Advocates. versus PRABHAT KUMAR & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. H.S. Arora, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL % 1. ORDER1912.2018 The impugned order dated 29.09.2018 passed by the court of learned Additional District Judge-14, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (ADJ) in Civil Suit No.823/2018, listing the application filed by the respondents under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), without even giving him an opportunity to file a reply, for orders, is the subject-matter of challenge in this revision petition.2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was not given an opportunity to respond to the application under Order XII Rule 6 CPC by the learned ADJ. C.R.P No.226/2018 Page 1 ...
Praveen Mittal & Anr vs.the State of Nct of Delhi & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2018
$~1 & 2 (common order) IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:19. h December, 2018 + CRL.M.C. 4578/2015 and Crl. M.A. 16340/2015 PRAVEEN MITTAL & ANR Through: Mr. Vipin Nandwani, Advocate ........ Petitioners versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with SI Anuj Kumar, PS Anand Vihar. Mr. Rajat Wadhwa, Adv. with Mr. Ashish Batra, Adv. for R-2. + CRL.M.C. 3182/2016 and Crl. M.A. 13609/2016 DIVYA MITTAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Wadhwa, Adv. with Mr. Ashish Batra, Advocate STATE & ORS. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with SI Anuj Kumar, PS Anand Vihar. Mr. Vipin Nandwani, Advocate for R-2, 3 & 4 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA1 ORDER (ORAL) Both these petitions arise out of the same criminal case, giving rise to similar questions about same set of orders, involving the same Crl. M.C. 4578/2015 & 3182/2016 Page 1 of 10 set of parties and, therefore, have b...
Union of India vs.central Tibetan Schools Admin.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2018
$~12 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:19. 12.2018 LPA982003 & CM Nos. 7856/2016, 37858-37860/2017, UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.D. Windlesh, Adv. versus CENTRAL TIBETAN SCHOOLS ADMIN. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sumit Rastogi, Adv. for R-2 to 5, 7, 9, 16, 18 & 19 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM No.7855/2016 (restoration) and CM No.7857/2016 (condonation of delay of 2590 days) 1. This is an application seeking restoration of the writ petition, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 15.12.2008. The application seeking restoration is accompanied with an application for condonation of 2590 days delay in filing the application seeking restoration.2. The only ground, which has been urged for seeking condonation of delay is that the counsel appearing in the matter was elevated as a Judge of this Court and the department was not aware about the peculiar circumstances. This ave...
Joginder @ Danny & Anr. Vs.state (Nct) of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 336/2017 Reserved on: October 26, 2018 Date of decision: December 19, 2018 1. JOGINDER @ DANNY2 VINOD JATAV Appellants Through: Mr. Hemant Gulati, Advocate Mr. Aditya Madaan. Advocate versus STATE (NCT) OF DELHI ... Respondent % + Through: ASC Sanjay Lao with Mr. Hirein Sharma, Advocate for State of NCT of Delhi + CRL.A. 515/2017 3. RAJINDER @ JINDER Appellant Through: Mr. M. N. Dudeja, Advocate Mr. Jitendra Sethi, Advocate versus STATE (NCT) OF DELHI ... Respondent Through: ASC Sanjay Lao with Mr. Hirein Sharma, Advocate for State of NCT of Delhi CRL.As. 336/2017 & 515/2017 Page 1 of 58 CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA I.S. Mehta, J.: JUDGMENT1 The Appellants have preferred two separate appeal i.e. (Crl. A. 336/2017 & Crl. A. 515/2017) under Section 374 Read with Section 482 Cr.P.C., against a common judgment and order on sentence dated 22.02.2017 and 28.02.2017 respectively by which all the Appellants have been convicted ...
Rajvir Singh Atal & Ors vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2018
$~11 to 13 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 6287/2014 versus ........ Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Ravi Prakash Gupta, Advocate. Mr.Harsh Ahuja, Advocate for UOI. Ms.Mrinalini Sen, Standing Counsel for DDA with Ms.Kritika Gupta & Mr.Tanmay Yadav, Advocates. Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel for L&B /LAC. Through: Ms.Monica Arora, CGSC with KARTAR SINGH & ORS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. + W.P.(C) 6297/2014, CM No.15208/2014 & CM No.20431/2014 RAJVIR SINGH ATAL & ORS UNION OF INDIA & ORS + CONT.CAS(C) 212/2015, CM No.4631/2015 & CM No.10049/2015 Through: Mr.Vikas Mahajan, CGSC for UOI. Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel for L&B /LAC. Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel for DDA with Ms.Gauri Chaturvedi & Ms.Mrinalini Sharma, Advocates. Through: Mr.Ravi Prakash Gupta, Advocate. ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioners versus RAJVIR SINGH ATAL ........ Petitioner WP(C) 6287& 6297/2014and Cont. Cas (C) 212/2015 Page 1 of 19 versus JAGDISH PRASAD & ORS Through: Mr.Ra...
Sachin Kumar vs.the State and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2018
* + + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: December 19, 2018 CRL.M.C. 2079/2017 CRL.M.C. 2080/2017 CRL.M.C. 2081/2017 SACHIN KUMAR ASHOK RAJAN AGARWAL RINKI GUPTA Through: Mr. Kawal Nain and Mr. Rohit .....Petitioners Dadwal, Advocates versus THE STATE AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Manish Sharma, Mr. Prnay Raj Singh, Advocates for respondents 2 to 4 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) In the above captioned three petitions, the challenge is to the impugned order of 30th January, 2017 vide which petitioners revision petitions have been dismissed by observing that the rejection of petitioners prayer under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C is justified, as no Crl.M.C. 2079-81/2017 Page 1 of 3 evidence is required to be collected by the police and the matter is pending before the trial court for recording of pre-summoning evidence. At the out...
Tripti De vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2018
$~22 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO1282017 & C.M. No.10459/2017 TRIPTI DE ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sumit R. Sharma, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL % 1. ORDER1912.2018 The impugned order dated 09.12.2016 passed by the court of the learned Additional District Judge-04, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, (ADJ) in Arbitration Case No.20350/2016 titled as UOI Vs. Tripti De by which the delay in filing the petition under Section 34 (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) was condoned, is the subject-matter of challenge in this appeal.2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that admittedly copy of the impugned award dated 19.04.2016 was received by the respondent on 30.05.2016 whereas the petition under Section 34 of the Act was filed on 02.12.2016, that is, after expiry of limitation of 90+30 days, as provided under Section 34 (3) of the Act. FAO No.128/2017 Page 1 of 2 3. Afte...
Ramesh vs.state (Gnctd) and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:7. h December, 2018 Judgment pronounced on:19th December, 2018 CRL. L. P. 720/2018 RAMESH ....... Petitioner Through : Mr. Rajendra Yadav, Advocate. Versus ....Resondents. Through : Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for the State with SI Ranbir Singh, PS-Neb Sarai. STATE (GNCTD) & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J CRL. L. P. 720/2018 1. In view of the decision of the Honble Supreme Court of India in Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead), represented through Legal Representatives vs. State of Karnataka & Ors., reported at 2018 (14) SCALE32 the victim is no longer required to apply for leave to appeal against the order of acquittal. Consequently, the present criminal leave to appeal is allowed. The matter is directed to be registered as a Criminal Appeal. CRL.A. /2018 (To be numbered) 1. This appeal is arising out of the judgment dated 31.08.2018 passed by the...
Gurpreet Singh& Anr. Vs.delhi District Cricket Association & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2018
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:19. 12.2018 CO.A.(SB) 53/2015 GURPREET SINGH& ANR. ..... Appellants Through Mr.Ishaan Madaan & Mr.Sahil Gupta, versus Advocates DELHI DISTRICT CRICKET ASSOCIATION & ORS. ......... RESPONDENTS Through Ms.Sonali Malhotra, Adv. for R-1 Mr.Vipul Sharma, Adv. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. This appeal is filed under Section 10 (F) of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) seeking to impugn the order dated 30.06.2015 passed by the Company Law Board, New Delhi Bench, New Delhi permitting compounding of the offences committed under Section 299 of the Act.2. It is the contention of the appellants that they are life members of respondent No.1 /Delhi District Cricket Association (in short the DDCA), which is a company incorporated under Section 25 of the Act. It is also their claim that they were instrumental in institution of the inspection of records of the company which was ca...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »