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.
Sayada Begum vs.qaisar Dad Khan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2018
$~12 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:05. 03.2018 RSA562017 SAYADA BEGUM ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Raman Kapur, Senior Advocate with Mr. F. Hasan and Mr. Farooq Chaudhry, Advs. Versus ..... Respondent QAISAR DAD KHAN Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J (Oral) 1. This second appeal impugns an order dated 14.10.2016 of the First Appellate Court in RCA No.76/2016 which set aside the decree granted in favour of the appellant in her suit for eviction of the respondent from an area forming part of village Ghonda Chauhan Bangar in north-east Delhi. At the first appellate stage, the respondent had argued that the suit area being urbanised and forming part of Seelampur Revenue District was covered under the Delhi Rent Control Act, therefore, the Civil Judge could not have adjudicated upon the suit. The evidence considered by the first Appellate Court was a statement of the Kanoongo (from the office of the SDM of the area)....
Millennium & Copthorne International Limited vs.aryans Plaza Services ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h March, 2018 CS(COMM) 774/2016 MILLENNIUM & COPTHORNE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Raj Shekhar Rao, Mr. J.V. Abhay, Ms. Rosalyn Malik and Ms. Kruttika Vijay, Advs. Versus ARYANS PLAZA SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sohan Singh Rana, Mr. Daljeet Dabas and Ms. Parul Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW. IA No.15008/2016 (under Order VII Rule 11 CPC) 1. Rejection of the plaint is sought on the ground of this Court not having territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit.2. 3. The counsels have been heard. The plaintiff, based in Singapore, has instituted this suit to restrain the defendant No.1, carrying on business in the name and style of defendants No.3 and 4 i.e. Millennium Hotel, Faridabad and Millennium Hotel & Resorts, Palwal, Haryana, from infringing the trade mark MILLENNIUM of the plaintiff and from thereby passing off its services as that...
Today Merchandise Private Limited & Anr. Vs.www.indiatodays.com & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2018
23 $~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 114/2018 & I.As. 12227/2015 AND8312018 TODAY MERCHANDISE PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. .....Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Setu Niket, Advocate with Ms. Esha Mazumdar, Advocate. versus WWW.INDIATODAYS.COM & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Ms. Geetanjali Vishwanathan, Advocate with Ms. Asavari Jain, Advocate for defendant No.3. Date of Decision:05. h March, 2018. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (Oral) 1. Present suit has been filed for permanent injunction, restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, transfer of domain name, unfair competition, rendition of accounts, damages, delivery-up etc against the defendants. The prayer clause in the present suit is reproduced hereinbelow:-"38. In view of the statements and submissions made hereinabove, it is most respectfully prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to grant the following reliefs in favour of the plaintiffs; CS (COMM) 114/2018 Page 1 of 6 injunction...
The Management of Rukamani Devi Jaipuria Public School vs.the Director ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision : March 05, 2018 W.P.(C) 6155/2016 THE MANAGEMENT OF RUKAMANI DEVI JAIPURIA PUBLIC SCHOOL Through: Dr. M Y Khan, Advocate ........ Petitioner * % + Versus THE DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Santosh K Tripathi, ASC, + GNCTD for respondent no.1 with Mr. R K Gambhir, DEO of R-1/Directorate of Education Mr. Parvinder Chauhan, Advocate for Respondent -Bharti Sharma W.P.(C) 6156/2016 + THE MANAGEMENT OF RUKMANI DEVI JAIPURIA PUBLIC SCHOOL Through: Dr. M Y Khan, Advocate ........ Petitioner Versus THE DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Santosh K Tripathi, ASC, GNCTD for respondent no.1 with Mr. R K Gambhir, DEO of R-1/Directorate of Education Mr. Ashok Aggarwal & Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Advocates for Respondent no.2 W.P.(C) 6513/2016 THE MANAGEMENT OF RUKMANI DEVI W.P.(C) 6513/2016, 6155/2016 & 6156/2016 Page 1 of 9 JAIPURIA PUBLIC SCHOOL ........ Petitioner Through: Dr. M Y Kha...
Ashwani Khattar vs.sh.vijay Kumar Bhatia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2018
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. (COMM) 105/2018 and IA No.3080-3082/2018 ........ Petitioner ASHWANI KHATTAR Through: Mr Pradeep K. Bakshi and Ms Prachi V. Sharma, Advocates. versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr Rajesh Banati, Advocate. SH.VIJAY KUMAR BHATIA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER0503.2018 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the Act) impugning an arbitral award dated 14.12.2017 (hereafter the impugned award) passed by the Arbitral Tribunal comprising of a sole arbitrator (hereafter the Arbitral Tribunal).2. The impugned award has been rendered in the context of disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to a Collaboration Agreement dated 08.04.2008 (hereafter the Agreement). By the impugned award, the claims made by the petitioner have been rejected by the Arbitral Tribunal as being barred by limitation. O.M.P. (COMM) 105/20...
Anita vs.bijender Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2018
#11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:05. 03.2018 versus ..... Appellant ..... Respondent MAT APP. (F.C) 123/2015 A B S Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent : Ms. Swati Rathi, Advocate for appellant along with appellant. : Mr. Rajat Aneja, Ms. Chandrika Gupta and Ms. Vandna Aneja, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) 1. The present matrimonial appeal assails an order dated 27.08.2012 in HMA No.56/2010 titled as Sh. B S vs. Smt. A, whereby, the respondent husbands petition seeking divorce inter alia on the ground of desertion was decreed in favour of the said respondent husband (hereinafter referred to as husband) by the learned Family Court, Rohini, New Delhi.2. The solitary ground on which the appeal is predicated is that the husband, in order to take advantage of his own wrong, deserted the appellant MAT APP (F.C.) 123/2015 Page 1 of ...
Airports Authority of India vs.unity Pratibha Consortium
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2018
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:05. 03.2018 + O.M.P. (COMM) 395/2017 & IA No.12980/2017 AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ........ Petitioner Versus ..... Respondent UNITY PRATIBHA CONSORTIUM Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU : Mr K. K. Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr Dig Vijay Rai, Ms Chetana Rai and Mr Pulkit Tyagi. : None. VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioner (hereafter the AAI) has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the Act) impugning an arbitral award dated 29.07.2017 (hereafter the impugned award) rendered by an Arbitral Tribunal comprising of a sole arbitrator.2. By the impugned award, the Arbitral Tribunal has awarded a sum of 47,92,321/- in favour of the respondent and further directed that the bank guarantees amounting to 2,35,92,000/- be released. The O.M.P. (COMM) 395/2017 Page 1 of 14 counter claim p...
Ashok Kumar vs.jamia Millia Islamia & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: March 05, 2018 W.P.(C) 2014/2018 & CM82872018 ASHOK KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Vishrut Raj, Mr. Anubhav Mehrotra and Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Advocates versus JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Swaroop George, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. Apoorv Kurup and Ms. Ishal Mital, Advocate for respondent-UGC Mr. Bhagwan Swarup Shukla, CGSC, Mr. Suraj Kumar and Mr. Kamal Deep, Advocates for respondent No.4 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) 1. The grievance of petitioner is that he had applied for the post of Reader in the Department of Adult and Continuing Education and Extension and though he was selected, but he was not appointed. In the first round of litigation, respondent-University was called upon not to take final decision till the Visitor decides the Reference made to him by respondent-University regarding appointment on the post in question. Vide Communication of 29th July, 2009 (A...
Farah vs.shahnaz Begum
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2018
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:5. h March, 2018 + FARAH RFA3862016 Through: Ms. Pooja Sarwal & Mr. Roop Ram ..... Appellant Sarwal, Advocates. versus SHAHNAZ BEGUM Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.(Oral) The present appeal arises out of judgement and decree dated 2nd 1. January, 2016 by which the Trial Court has dismissed the suit for possession and mesne profits on the ground that the Respondent/Defendant (hereinafter Defendant) is a tenant of the Appellant/Plaintiff (hereinafter Plaintiff) and the suit is barred under Section 50 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter, DRC Act).2. Admittedly, the Defendant is the aunt (Mausi) of the Plaintiff. It is the case of the Plaintiff that she is the rightful owner of the property bearing No.17/17-V, Khasra No.17 & 18, Vijay Park, Maujpur, Delhi-110053, measuring 70 square yards (hereinafter, suit property). It is the case of both parties that in 2010...
Asha vs.suraj Bhan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2018
$~4 & 41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 954/2015 Decided on:5. h March, 2018 + SURAJ BHAN ........ Petitioner ASHA Through: Mr. Deepak Sharma & Mr. Manish, Advocates. versus Through: Mr. Jai Bansal, Advocate ..... Respondent RC.REV. 39/2018 & CM No.4377/2018 ASHA SURAJ BHAN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Jai Bansal, Advocate versus Through: Mr. Deepak Sharma & Mr. ..... Respondent Manish, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. Both these petitions arise out of the proceedings relating to the eviction case (E No.68/2014 new ARC258672016) registered on the application of Suraj Bhan (landlord) who is petitioner in CM (M) CM (M) 954/2015 & conn. Page 1 of 6 954/2015 and respondent in RC Rev.39/2018 seeking an order of eviction on the ground of bona fide need under Section 14 (1) (e) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 which is governed by the special procedure envisaged in Section 25 B of the said enactment, such proceedings being directed agains...
- ‹ Prev
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 62
- 63
- 64
- Next ›
- Last »