Delhi Court March 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.
Mahender Singh vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: March 19, 2018 + CRL.A. 695/2016 ARUN KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Rajiv Mohan, Mr.Abhimanyu Kampani, Mr.Abhisheik Srivastav, Ms.Priyanka Singh and Mr.M.A. Karthik, Advocates. versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for State with SI Prabhakaran, PS Chhawla. STATE AND + CRL.A. 867/2016 MAHENDER SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Rajiv Mohan, Mr.Abhimanyu Kampani, Mr.Abhisheik Srivastav, Ms.Priyanka Singh and Mr.M.A. Karthik, Advocates. versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for State with SI Prabhakaran, PS Chhawla. STATE Crl.A. 695/2016 & 867/2016 Page 1 of 42 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI JUDGMENT OF THE COURT1 Since both these appeals have been preferred against a common judgment of conviction and order on sentence, therefore, both these appeals are taken together.2. The present appeals have been filed by the convicts/ appellants (hereinafter referred...
Sunita Bansal vs.the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :19. h MARCH, 2018 W.P.(CRL) 796/2018 SUNITA BANSAL ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.Ajit Kakkar, Advocate with Ms.S.Pani, Advocate. versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through : Mr.Sanjay Lao, ASC. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG + S.P.GARG, J.(Oral) 1. Present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner to seek directions to the Trial Court to expedite the process of taking cognizance of the charge-sheet filed under Sections 498A/4IPC. Status report not filed.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Only grievance of the petitioner is that despite filing of charge-sheet long back, the learned Trial Court has not taken any decision to take cognizance.3. Perusal of the file reveals that the charge-sheet was filed in the Court in 2016. However, till date no cognizance has been taken. W.P.(Crl.) 7...
Shakuntala Devi & Anr vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
$~64 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:19. h March, 2018 + W.P.(C) 11150/2015 SHAKUNTALA DEVI & ANR ........ Petitioners Through Ms. Richa Oberoi with Mr. Ankit versus Banati, Advocates. UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for L&B/LAC. Mr. Arjun Pant, Advocate for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioners seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated in respect of the land of petitioners comprised in Khasra no.394 (0-10) and 396 (0-13), measuring 1 bigha 3 biswas, situated in the revenue estate of village Neb Sarai, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the subject land) is deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation...
M/S l.g. Electronics India (P) Ltd vs.dinesh Kalra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
$~4 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI5 Date of Judgment:19. h March, 2018 FAO(OS)(COMM) 86/2016 M/S L.G. ELECTRONICS INDIA (P) LTD ..... Appellant Through Mr. Ravi Sikri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjay Gupta and Mr. Deepank Yadav, Advocates DINESH KALRA versus ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sachin Datta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manikya Khanna, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is an appeal filed under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015(hereinafter referred to as the Commercial Courts Act) read with Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996(hereinafter referred to as the Act). The appellant impugns the order dated 08.07.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court by which the objections to the award dated 28.06.2013 passed by an Arbitral Tribunal comprising of three former Judges of th...
Dharmender Choudhary vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi. & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:19. h March, 2018 CRL.M.C.3521/2014 and CRL.M.A. 12167/2014 + Dharmender Choudhary ...Petitioner Through: Mr. K.K. Manan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ankush Narang, Ms. Shivani Kant & Mr. Bhavya Chauhan, Advocates. versus Govt. of NCT of Delhi.... RESPONDENTNo.1 Jasmine Ahuja.... RESPONDENTNo.2 Alok Ahuja.... RESPONDENTNo.3 Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, APP for State with SI Deepak, PS Lajpat Nagar. Mr. Jayant K. Sud, Senior Advocate with Ms. Vaishali Soni & Mr. Honey Khanna, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA I. S. MEHTA, J.JUDGMENT1 The petitioner Dharmender Choudhary is invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 against the impugned order dated 23.05.2014 passed by the CRL.M.C. 3521/2014 Page 1 of 20 learned ASJ in Criminal Appeal No.20/2011 title as Dharmender Choudhary v. State & Ors. wherein the learned ASJ has dismissed the appeal of the petition...
Jagdish Kumar Koli vs.national Bal Bhavan & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
* + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: March 19, 2018 W.P.(C) 2540/2018 JAGDISH KUMAR KOLI Through: Mr. Jai Bansal, Advocate ........ Petitioner versus NATIONAL BAL BHAVAN & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Roshan Lal Goel and Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocates for respondent No.2-UOI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL)... Petitioner claims to be working as Manager (Publication) with respondent-National Bal Bhawan since the year 2004 and it is the case of petitioner that in view of the proceedings of 24th October, 2011 of National Commission for Scheduled Castes (Annexure P-3), One Man Committee was set up by second respondent and this Committee vide its Report of 5th May, 2014 (Annexure P-8) had concluded that petitioner is not being harassed on account of his minority status.... Petitioner further claims that in March, 2012, he had sought revision of his Grade Pay from `4200/- to `5400/- and in July, 2012, respondent-National Bal Bhawan in its Communicat...
V4 Infrastructure Private Ltd vs. Jindal Biochem Private Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:19. 03.2018 O.M.P. (COMM) 352/2017 % + V4 INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LTD .....Petitioner Versus JINDAL BIOCHEM PRIVATE LTD .... Respondent AND + O.M.P. (COMM) 353/2017 V4 INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LTD .....Petitioner Versus JINDAL BIOCHEM PRIVATE LTD Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr S.K. Chaturvedi and Mr Amit Sood. : Mr Vikas Kakkar and Mr Vaibhav Tiwari. in OMP (COMM) 353/2017. .... Respondent CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioner (hereafter VIPL) has filed the present petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the Act) impugning an arbitral award dated 20.05.2017 (hereafter the impugned award) rendered by the Sole Arbitrator, O.M.P. (COMM) 352/2017 & 353/2017 Page 1 of 9 Justice M.L. Mehta, Retired (hereafter the Arbitral Tribunal). The impugned award was rendered in the context of two Space Buyer Ag...
Genex Industries Limited vs.union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
$~42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:19. 3.2018 + W.P.(C) 2550/2018 GENEX INDUSTRIES LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Shubhankar Sengupta, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Vniyal with Mr. Dhawal Vniyal, Advs. for R-1. CORAM:-"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER % RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) CM No.10535/2018 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 2550/2018 2. The substantive prayers made in the suit is as follows: Call for the records of the Respondent and issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent to restitute to the petitioner the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) from the date of deposit being sometime in July, 2000 till date together with interest @ 18% per annum; The relief sought by the petitioner is in the following broad facts: The petitioner was awarded a contract for wool combing and allied works.3. 3.1 His contract contained ...
Snecma vs.union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:12. 03.2018 Judgment pronounced on:19. 03.2018 + W.P.(C) 3250/2017 & C.M. No.26210/2017 SNECMA Through: Mr. Gaurav Miglani with Mr. ........ Petitioner UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. versus Davesh Vashishtha, Advocates. ....Respondents Through: Mr. Kritiman Singh, CGSC for UOI with Mr. Prateek Dhanda, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.1. This action has been initiated to assail communication dated 17.3.2017 and 3.4.2017 which are appended as Annexure-D & Annexure- A respectively to the petition. These communications have been addressed by respondent no.2 to the petitioner herein. 1.1 I may only indicate that the date appended on Annexure-D has been erroneously set out as 17.4.2017, whereas the correct date is 17.3.2017. 1.2 In so far as this aspect of the matter is concerned, there is no dispute raised before me by learned counsel for the parties.2. Moving further and in order to adjudicate upon...
Yogendra Mittal vs.union of India & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: March 19, 2018 W.P.(C) 2553/2018 & CMs 10541-44/2018 YOGENDRA MITTAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Vijay Aggarwal and Mr. Ashish, Advocates versus Through: Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC UNION OF INDIA & ANR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR .....Respondents ORDER (ORAL) 1. The order impugned in this petition is of 18th December, 2017 (Annexure-A), which declines petitioners application seeking appointment of an advocate as Defence Assistant in the departmental proceedings pending against petitioner.2. At the outset, learned counsel for respondents submits that against impugned order, petitioner has to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi.3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that impugned order is an interlocutory one and so, in view of Rule 22 (ii) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules [for short CCS (CCA) Rules]., this petition is maintainable, as the remedy lies befor...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »