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.
Ifci Factors Ltd vs.spanco Limited & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
10 $~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 2781/2015 IFCI FACTORS LTD ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Anupam Srivastava, Advocate Mr. Dhairya Gupta, Advocates. with Shreya Mehta and versus SPANCO LIMITED & ANR Through: Mr. Sunil Choudhary, Advocate for defendant No.2. ..... Defendants % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN Date of Decision:05. h February, 2018 JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) I.A. 3918/2017 in CS(OS) 2781/2015 1. Present application has been filed on behalf of the defendant No.2 under Section 8 read with Section 5 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.2. In the present application, it has been averred that the Clause 25 of the Agreement for the Factoring of Receivables dated 26th July, 2011 executed between the plaintiff and defendant No.1 contains an arbitration clause. CS (OS) 2781/2015 Page 1 of 6 3. Learned counsel for defendant No.2 states that since the plaintiff has filed the present suit jointly against defendants No.1 and 2, it will have to first...
Sarthak Khandelwal and Ors. Vs.air India Limited and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 05, 2018 + W.P.(C) 1008/2018 & C.Ms. 4286-87/2018 1. SARTHAK KHANDELWAL AND ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Aditya Mewar, Advocate Versus AIR INDIA LIMITED AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Suruchi Suri, Advocates for respondents No.1 to 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) In this petition, petitioners seek promotion from Co-pilots to Captain Grade/ Wide Body Pilots. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that to seek the relief as claimed in this petition, a Representation was filed in July, 2017 but copy of the said Representation is not on record. However, an Appeal, filed on 6th November, 2017 (Annexure P- 5), against the New Seniority List is on record. It is noticed that copy of the appeal (Annexure P-5) is incomplete.2. According to petitioners counsel, neither the Representation nor the Appeal, has been responded to by respondent No.2.3. In the facts and circumstances of this cas...
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence vs.raju Arora
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : FEBRURY05 2018. + CRL.L.P. 6/2018 DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.Satish Aggarwala, Advocate. versus RAJU ARORA ..... Respondent Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Present petition under Section 378 (iv) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by the petitioner-Directorate of Revenue Intelligence for leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 08.09.2017 of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Complaint Case No.254/01/16.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is urged that the trial court did not appreciate the evidence in correct perspective. Summons to appear before the Investigating Agency were issued by speed post and were duly served upon the respondent. The trial court Crl.L.P.6/2018 Page 1 of 3 ignored the statutory presumption of service of summons sent by speed post as prescribed under Sect...
Danisco India Private Limited vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision :05. 02.2018 + W.P.(C) 5908/2015 DANISCO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Sujit Ghosh, Ms. Kanupriya Bhargava and Ms. Mannat Waraich, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Prasanta Verma, SCGC with Ms.Shalu Goswami, Adv. for UOI/R1. Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel and Mr. Puneet Rai, Jr. Standing Counsel for Income Tax Deptt. Mr. C. Mukund, Ms.Geetika Matta and Mohd. Farib Ahmed, Advs. for RBI/R4 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL) % The petitioner is aggrieved of Section 206AA of the Income Tax Act (the Act) (introduced by Finance Bill No.2 of 2009) that directs a levy of 20% in the case of outward remittances in the hands of the payer (hereafter referred to as the deductor ) and is applicable W.P.(C) 5908/2015 Page 1 of 11 to assessees that are non-residents of India. Section 206...
Sanjeet Taneja vs.ravinder Kumar Taneja and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % SANJEET TANEJA RFA No.107/2018 5th February, 2018 Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Pramod Kumar Ahuja, Advocate. RAVINDER KUMAR TANEJA AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS versus Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. No.4236/2018 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. C.M. No.4238/2018 (for condonation of delay) 2. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 25 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. C.M. stands disposed of. RFA No.107/2018 and C.M. No.4237/2018 (stay) 3. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(CPC) is filed by the plaintiff in the suit RFA No.107/2018 Page 1 of 6 impugning the judgment of the Trial Court dated 31.10.2017 whereby trial court with respect to the subject suit for partition for two properties situated at Mumbai and Delhi has decreed the suit o...
Joginder Kaur and Ors vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:05. h February, 2018 + W.P.(C) 999/2016 JOGINDER KAUR & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.S.K.Rout, Mr.U.D.Bhargava and Mr.Aman Mehrotra, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for respondent/LAC-L&B. Mr.Shubhendu Advocate Advocate for respondent no.3/DDA. Bhattacharya, for Mr.Kunal Sharma, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Counter affidavit has been handed over in court; the same is taken on record.2. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioners seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings in respect of the land of the petitioners admeasuring 1 bigha comprised in Khasra No.731, situated in the revenue estate of village Tuglakabad, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the subject land) W.P. (C) No.999/2...
Hi Tech Medicalproducts Ltd vs.industrial Development Bank of India & ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
13 $~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 797/2016 HI TECH MEDICALPRODUCTS LTD ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Kuldip Singh, Advocate with Mr. Harpreet Singh, Mr. Pravesh Bhauguna and Mr. Gagan Kumar Sehgal, Advocates. versus INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA & ANR Through: Mr. Ajay Bahl, Advocate for ..... Defendants defendant No.1. Mr. Mayank Bhargava, Advocate with Ms. Shreya Mehra, Advocate for defendant No.3. Date of Decision:05. h February, 2018 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) I.A. 1348/2018 1. Present application has been filed on behalf of the State Bank of India-defendant No.3 under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC for its own deletion from the array of parties and dismissal of the suit against it. CS (COMM) 797/2016 Page 1 of 3 2. In the present application, it has been averred that the loan account of defendant No.2 stands settled under defendant No.3 Banks OTS-2017 Scheme and as such the defendant No.3 has no surv...
Rahees Ahmad vs.east Delhi Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
$~8 * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 7400/2016 Date of Decision:5. h February, 2018 RAHEES AHMAD ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. Arvind Kumar Shukla, versus Mr. Nihal Ahmad and Mr. Alok Shukla, Advs. EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS Through : Mr. Ajjay Aroraa and ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Kapil Dutta, Advs. for R-1/EDMC. Ms. Mini Pushkarna, Standing Counsel for R- 2/DUSIB. Mr. Relan, Standing Counsel for R- 3/DDA. Mr. Satyakam, ASC for R- 4/Delhi Police along with Insp. Vijay Kumar, PS Nand Nagri. Dhanesh CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE1 Ms. Mini Pushkarna, ld. Standing Counsel for the DUSIB has prayed for leave to handover an additional affidavit dated 3rd W.P.(C) No.7400/2016 Pg.1 of 6 February, 2018. Copy thereof has been furnished to ld. counsel for the petitioner. Let the additional affidavit be taken on record.2. The instant writ petition was filed by ...
S. B. International vs.the Assistant Director, Directorate of Revenue ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:05. 02.2018 + W.P.(C) 237/2018 & CM No.1023/2018 S. B. INTERNATIONAL ........ Petitioner Versus THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE AND ORS. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr Randhir Singh and Mr D.K. Devesh. : Mr Aditya Singla, Senior Standing Counsel ........ RESPONDENTS for DRI with Ms Drishti Harpalani and Mr Pallav Gupta, Advocates for R-1, 2 & 3. Mr Lavleen Goyal, Advocate for R-4/Axis Bank. CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The present petition has been filed by Shri Premji Bhanushali, who carries on his business, inter alia, under the name and style of a sole proprietorship concern, S. B. International. The petitioner impugns a letter dated 14.11.2017 (hereafter the impugned communication) issued by the Assistant Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) calling upon respondent no.4 (AXIS W.P.(C) 237/...
Uday Estate Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs.schindler India Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI OMP (COMM) 7/2018 Reserved on:9. h January, 2018, Date of decision:5. h February, 2018 UDAY ESTATE PVT. LTD. & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Sanat Kumar, Sr.Adv. with Versus Mr.Anish Chawla, Adv. SCHINDLER INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Aslam Ahmad and Ms.Shraddha Chaudhary, Advs. along with Mr.Sandeep Srivastava, AR in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA1 This petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Arbitral Award dated 24.08.2017 passed by the Sole Arbitrator in case Ref. No.DAC/605/8-14 in the matter of arbitration between M/s Schindler India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Uday Estate Pvt. Ltd. Anr. (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Award) 2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner No.1 was constructing a five star hotel namely Hotel De- Aqua at Shast...
- ‹ Prev
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- Next ›
- Last »