Delhi Court February 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.
M/S Prestress Wire Industries vs.m/s Uppal Builders Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:16. h January, 2018 Pronounced on:09. h February, 2018 + O.M.P. 1588/2014 & IA No.13751/2017 M/S PRESTRESS WIRE INDUSTRIES ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.Ankit Anandraj Shah Mr.Vivek R Mohanty, and Ms.Priyadarshini Patnaik, Advocates. versus M/S UPPAL BUILDERS PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through : Mr.L.B,Rai and Mr.Syed Kamran CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA Ali, Advocates. YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This petition is under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (hereinafter referred as the Act) challenging the award dated 17.04.2017 passed by the sole arbitrator.2. Vide an agreement dated 24.01.2009 M/s Prestress Wire Industries (the petitioner herein) had awarded the work of construction of factory building at Bajpur vide agreement dated 24.01.2009 amounting to `2,28,00,000/- to the contractor/the respondent herein who reduced its bid by 6.7% discount. Certain disputes arose between the parties and an arbitra...
Abw Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr. Vs.rail Land Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~9 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:9. h February, 2018 ARB. P. 463/2017 ABW INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.T.N.Durga Prasad, Mr.A.Garg, Mr.Rachit Aggarwal, Advs. versus RAIL LAND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Through: None ..... Respondent 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 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes that have arisen due to non-signing of the Development Agreement by the respondent pursuant to the Letter of Acceptance dated 19.05.2008 issued by the respondent in favour of the petitioners.2. Admittedly, the Letter of Acceptance does not contain any arbitration agreement between the parties.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the arbitration Arb. P. 463/2017 Page 1 of 7 agreement between the parties is contained...
M/S Dr. Randhawa Ultrasonogaphy Imaging and Research Institute (Throug ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~4 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:09. 02.2018 + W.P.(C)No.612/2018 & CM No.2685/2018 M/S DR. RANDHAWA ULTRASONOGAPHY IMAGING AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE (THROUGH DR J S RANDHAWA) AND ANR. ........ Petitioners Through : Mr. Khowaja Siddiqui, Mr. Ashwini Kumar and Mr. Arup Sinha, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ...... RESPONDENTS Through : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, ASC, GNCTD for R-2 to 4. CORAM:-"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) 1. On the last date i.e., 22.1.2018, I had issued notice in the matter and zeroed down on the issue pertaining to jurisdiction of the authority which had passed the impugned order. The relevant aspects pertaining, inter alia, to jurisdiction as adverted to therein read as follows: This petition seeks to challenge the show-cause notice dated 22nd December, 2017 and suspension order of even date. The contention of the counsel for the W.P.(C)No.612/2018 Page 1 of 7 petiti...
Naresh Kumar Bansal vs.trimurthi Hightech Co Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on :04. 12.2017 Date of Judgment:09. 02.2018 + NARESH KUMAR BANSAL R.F.A. 386/2017 ..... Appellant/plaintiff. Through: Mr. Rajeev Aggarwal Mr.Ankit Gupta, Advocates. and TRIMURTHI HIGHTECH CO PVT LTD & ANR. versus ..... RESPONDENTS/defendants. Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL VINOD GOEL, J.1. The appellant/plaintiff has challenged the impugned judgment and decree dated 06.12.2016 passed by the court of Additional District Judge-II, North West, District Rohini Courts, Delhi (in short learned ADJ) by which his Civil Suit No.76092/2016 against the respondents/defendants was dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs.12,13,200/- against the respondents/defendants on account of arrears of outstanding amount for supply of material i.e. Ready Mix Concrete (in short RMC). It is claimed that the appellant/p...
Dharamveer vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 09, 2018 + W.P.(C) 1170/2018 1. DHARAMVEER ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K. Shukla, Advocate Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Vivek Goyal, CGSC & Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Shahi & Mr. Harsh Pandit, Advocates for respondent No.1-UOI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL)... Petitioner claims that he had applied for the post of Waterman in Central Public Works Department (CPWD) on 7th April, 2010 and since then, he has been running from pillar to post but has not come to know as to why he has not been appointed on the post of Waterman. In this petition, a declaration is sought that non-calling of petitioner for interview for the post of Waterman is in violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India and compensation is also sought by petitioner.2. Communication of 16th March, 2016 (Annexure P-7) issued by CPWD reveals that though the Employment Exchange had forwarded two ID numbers rela...
Vinoy Kumar vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~1 * + W.P.(C) 6684/2016 VINOY KUMAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.R.K.Shukla, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms.Anjana Gosain, Ms.Rabiya Singh Thakur & Ms.Shalini Nair, Advocates for R-1 to R-3 CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI ORDER0902.2018 The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment dated 11.09.2015 % 1. passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissing OA No.4008/2013 filed by him praying inter alia for quashing/setting aside the order of reduction in pay, issued by the respondents/Postal Department as also the order directing recovery of an excess amount of `53,181/- from him.2. The brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner was appointed to the post of a Postal Assistant in the Department of Posts on 15.06.1983. He had successfully qualified in the accounts W.P.(C) No.6684/2016 Page 1 of 10 examination in the Post Office and Railway Mail Service (in...
Balaji Digital Solutions Pvt Ltd. Vs.rajesh Jalan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~OS-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:09. 02.2018 + CS(COMM) 614/2016 BALAJI DIGITAL SOLUTIONS PVT LTD. Through Mr.Arpit Kr.Singh, Adv. .... Plaintiff versus RAJESH JALAN ..... Defendant Through Mr.Raghav Parmatiyar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) I.A.No.1253/2017 1. This application is filed by the defendant under Order 37 Rule 3(5) Civil Procedure Code seeking leave to defend.2. The present suit is filed under Order 37 CPC as a summary suit for recovery of Rs.1,76,50,870.23/- along with interest and costs.3. It is the case of the plaintiff as pleaded in the plaint that the defendant who is the sole proprietor of M/s Rajesh Trading is a regular costumer of the plaintiff. It is also the case of the plaintiff that the defendant maintained a running account of the plaintiff. The plaintiff supplied goods, namely, polyester durries and quilt covers to the defendant on various occasions. Total 26 invoices/bills were raised fro...
Shahzad Ahmed vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + SHAHZAD AHMED CRL.A. 1196/2013 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Satish Tamta, Senior Advocate with Mr S. Qamar, Mr. Shariq Iqbal and Mr. Abhishek Vikram, Advocates versus STATE CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC and Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP and Ms. Aakashi, Advocates for State JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA % ORDER0902.2018 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: Crl.M.A.1533/2018 in Crl.A.1196/2013 1. This is an application by the State under Section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr PC) for permission to lead additional evidence before the trial Court, against the impugned judgment dated 25th July 2013 and order on sentence dated 30th July 2013 of which the present appeal has been filed by the Appellant accused.2. It must be noted at the outset that, against the same impugned order on sentence dated 30th July 2013, the State has filed Crl. Appeal No.1459 of 2013 praying fo...
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs.m/s Rathi Ispat Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision :09. 02.2018 + ITA1512018 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. versus M/S RATHI ISPAT PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL) % The Revenues appeal seeks deletion of the sum of Rs.1,78,51,005/- brought to tax added by the Assessing Officer.2. The assessee had reported receipt of the said sum of Rs.1,78,51,005/- as share premium and call in arrears. These amounts pertain to offering in the public issue made by the assessee in 1994-95. The offer was made to both existing shareholders and the general public. The call arrears were reflected in the assessees books for several years and in the assessment year AY200506, the books reflected that the arrears were paid off. The Assessing Officer considered this feature to be unusual and queried the assessee with re...
Airports Authority of India vs.m/s Tdi International (India) Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2018
$~22 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) 115/2017 & CM No.14396/2017 % Date of decision :9. h February, 2018 AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through : Mr. K.K. Rai, Sr. Adv. with Rai, Mr. Mr. Digvijay Chandrashekhar Chakalabbi and Mr. A. Rai, Advs. versus M/S TDI INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) LTD ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Ashish Mohan and Mr. Akshit Mago, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE1 This appeal filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the Arbitration Act) assails the order dated 15th February, 2017 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing OMP4902011 filed by M/S TDI International India Ltd. (respondent herein TDI hereafter) under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. FAO(OS)No.115/2017 Page 1 of 8 2. By way of OMP4902011, TDI had laid objections to the Arbitral Award dated 19th April, 2011 passed by the sole Arbitrator in ...
- ‹ Prev
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- Next ›
- Last »