Delhi Court April 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.
Bajrangi Nirala vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: April 21, 2018 + CRL.A. 891/2016 BAJRANGI NIRALA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Aditya Vikram, DHCLSC & Mr. Avinash, Advocate. STATE Versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, Addl. Public Prosecutor for State with Inspector Surinder Pal & SI Sushil of Police Station Defence Colony. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Appellant was tried for committing murder of Kundan Verma, s/o Laxmi Prasad Bhagat, on the night intervening 9th/ 10th June, 2012, in a room of CPWD Horticulture Nursery, at Sadiq Nagar, New Delhi and upon conclusion of trial in FIR No.67/2012, registered at Police Station Defence Colony, New Delhi, he stands convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC vide judgment of 30th March, 2016 and vide order of 11th April, 2016, he has been sentenced to imprisonment for life.2. The substratum of prosecution case, as noticed in the impugned judgment, is...
Altus Group India Private Limited vs.darrameks Hotels & Developers Pri ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2018
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:20. h March, 2018 O.M.P. (COMM) 499/2016 ALTUS GROUP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv. with Ms.Savita Sarna, Ms.Chinmayee Chandra and Ms.Manila Munjal, Advs. versus DARRAMEKS HOTELS & DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Mr.Saurabh Banerjee and Mr.Bikranu Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA NAVIN CHAWLA, J.(Oral) 1. The present 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 06.07.2015 passed by the Sole Arbitrator inter-alia holding therein that the termination of the Agreement dated 14.02.2011 by the respondent was invalid and consequentially granting the claims of the respondent for refund of the mobilization advance as also awarding damages for such unlawful termination in favour of the respondent and against the petitio...
Kulwant Singh & Anr vs.gurdeep Singh & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2018
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.331/2018 20th April, 2018 KULWANT SINGH & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Prasoon Kumar and Mr. Aditya Awasthi, Advocates. versus GURDEEP SINGH & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Manish Mohan, Advocate with Ms. Rohini, Advocate and Ms. Manisha Saroha, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CAVEAT No.343/2018 Since counsel for the caveator enters appearance the caveat stands discharged. C.M. Appl. No.15534/2018 (for exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. RFA No.331/2018 and C.M. Appl. No 15533/2018 (for stay) 2. By this Regular First Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), the respondents/defendants seek setting aside of the impugned judgment dated 30.1.2018 passed RFA No.331/2018 Page 1 of 7 by the trial court decreeing the suit ...
Sh. Dharmendra Kumar vs.state of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: April 20, 2018 W.P.(C) 3896/2018 & CM1538418 + * 1. SH. DHARMENDRA KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Senior Advocate with Mr.Gaurav Sharma and Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Jha, Advocates versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel with Mr. N.K. Singh and Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Advocates for respondents No.1 to 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Learned senior counsel for petitioner candidly states that this petition is essentially against order of 3rd May, 2012 vide which petitioners OBC certificate stood arbitrarily cancelled. It is submitted that no show-cause notice was received prior to the cancellation of the OBC certificate. It is the case of petitioner that the impugned cancellation of OBC certificate was not acted upon by petitioners employer and so, impugned cancellation was not challenged. It is pointed out that the occasion to challenge impugned...
Bhoop Singh and Ors vs.union of India and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2018
$~60 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:20. h April, 2018 + W.P.(C) 11637/2016 BHOOP SINGH & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Dr. Sarabjit Sharma and Ms. Palak Vashisth, Advocates. UNION OF INDIA & ANR versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Maninder Acharya, Senior Advocate, ASG with Mr. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC, Mr. Kavindra Gill (G.P.), with Mr. Yashish Chandra, Mr. Sahil Sood, Mr. Harshul Choudhary and Mr. Viplov Acharya, Advocates for Union of India. Mr. Ajay Verma, Senior Standing Counsel and Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing for respondent/DDA. Mr. Sanjay Kr. Pathak, Mr. Sunil Kr. Jha and Mr. Kushal Raj Tater, Advocates respondent /LAC/GNCTD. Ms. Vibha Mahajan Seth, Advocate for respondent/DMRC. Mr. Rahul Kashyap, Director, Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs. Counsel for CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM No.To be numbered) (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just excepti...
Arjun Malhotra vs.commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:12. h December, 2017 Date of decision:20. h April, 2018 + INCOME TAX APPEAL Nos. 405/2005 & 406/2005 ARJUN MALHOTRA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ved Jain &Mr.Pranjal Srivastava, versus Advocates. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .... Respondent Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue INCOME TAX APPEAL No.389/2007 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI .... Appellant Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue versus ARJUN MALHOTRA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ved Jain &Mr.Pranjal Srivastava, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH SANJIV KHANNA, J.: ITA Nos.405/2005 and 406/2005 have been filed by an individual, Arjun Malhotra impugning common order dated 29th January, 2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the tribunal) deciding ITA Nos.1433/Del/2002 and 1434/Del/2002 relating to ITA Nos. 405/2005, 406/2005 & 38...
M/S Hilton Roulunds Ltd. Vs.commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA3252005 M/S HILTON ROULUNDS LTD. Through: versus Reserved on :14. h December, 2017 Date of decision :20th April, 2018 . .... Appellant Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar & Mr. Aniket D. Aggarwal, Advocates. Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate. ..... Respondent COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh J., The short question arising in the present appeal is Whether the payment of Rs.1 Crore for exclusive use of the trade mark HILTON is to be treated as capital expenditure or revenue expenditure?.2. M/s. Hilton Roulands Ltd. (hereinafter appellant) entered into Trade Mark license agreement dated 27th January, 1993 (hereinafter first license agreement) which was later substituted with license agreement dated 9th November, 1995 (hereinafter second license agreement) with M/s. Hilton Rubbers Limited (hereinafter HRL). The question...
Directorate of Revenue Intelligenece vs.samson Ongera Omoro
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:20. h April, 2018 CRL.L.P.374/2016 DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Advocate. versus SAMSON ONGERA OMORO ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Yogesh Saxena, Ms. Priya Saxena and Mr. Sikander Azam Khan, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. By this petition the petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 4th June, 2016 acquitting the respondent for offence punishable under Section 21 (c) of NDPS Act.2. Case of the prosecution is that an information was received by Shri Surjeet Kumar, Senior Intelligence Officer, DRI (PW-6) on 29th July, 2010 that a person of African origin, aged about 40 years would be standing at the bus stand, Nirankari Sarover, Burari crossing and would be in possession of narcotic drug. The information was reduced in writing vide Ex.PW-2A and placed before Shri Atul Handa, Deputy Director who instr...
Pradeep Sharma & Anr vs.upl Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2018
$~12 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:20. 04.2018 FAO(OS) (COMM) 70/2018, CAV3392018 & CM APPLN. 15397- 15398/2018 PRADEEP SHARMA & ANR ..... Appellants UPL LTD Through Mr.Benu Gunjan Jha, Advocate. versus ..... Respondent Through Mr.Amit Sibal, Ms.Rajeshwari, and Mr.Tahir A.J., Mr.Aditya Mr.Amber, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(oral) 1. The appellant is aggrieved by an order restraining him from infringing the plaintiff/respondents patents (IN20613, IN19422 and IN24455- hereafter as INs 130, 225 and 551, respectively). IN225titled "a process of preparing a chemically stable synergistic herbicidal composition" is a process patent; IN130titled as "a chemically stable synergistic herbicidal composition" is a product patent and IN551titled as "a stable synergistic herbicidal composition" is both a product and process patent. According to the plaintiffs claim, Metsulfuron Methyl and Su...
Marico Ltd vs.mrs. Jagit Kaur
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-20-2018
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :12. h March, 2018 Date of Decision:20. h April, 2018 RFA172009 Through: Ms. Anuradha Salhotra & Mr. Achal ..... Appellant + MARICO LTD versus Shekhar, Advs. (M-9602338663). MRS. JAGIT KAUR Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT ..... Respondent Prathiba M. Singh, J.1. Before the Copyright Board, an application was preferred under Section 50 of the Copyright Act, 1957 by Hindustan Unilever Limited, the predecessor of Marico Ltd., Appellant herein, (hereinafter Appellant) against one M/s. J.K. Enterprises (proprietary concern of Mrs. Jagjit Kaur) (hereinafter, Respondent). The Appellant sought rectification of the impugned entry in the Register of Copyrights bearing No.A-64850/2003 dated 25th July, 2003, which is an artistic work for the label NIHAL UTTAM. The Appellant claims to be the successor-in-interest of Tata Oil Mill Company Ltd. (hereinafter, TOMCO) which had coined the brand name TATA NIHAR. In 1994, t...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »