Delhi Court July 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 Diesel s.p.a vs.m/s Smart Collection & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2018
$~20 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision :25th July, 2018 M/S DIESEL S.P.A CS (COMM) 237/2016 & I.A. 13923/2014 ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. S. K. Bansal, Mr. Pankaj Kumar & Mr. Kapil Kumar Giri, Advocates (M-9810438450). versus M/S SMART COLLECTION & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. H. P. Singh, Advocate for D-1 to 6&8 (M-9810008116). CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(ORAL) 1. The Plaintiff M/s. Diesel S.P.A., is an Italian company and the owner of the trademark DIESEL. The company was founded by Mr. Renzo Rosso, an Italian who adopted the mark DIESEL in 1978 for garments, but thereafter expanded into a range of mens products like fragrances, watches, eyewear, cosmetics, and various other accessories. The Plaintiffs products are claimed to be sold in more than 100 countries in the world. In India, the mark DIESEL is registered both in word form and logo form in several classes including classes 3, 9, 14, 16, 18, 24 25, 41 & 42, as stated...
Suresh Yadav vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2018
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:25. 07.2018 BAIL APPLN.2582/2016 SURESH YADAV GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Bipin Kumar Jha, Adv. For the Respondent: Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, APP for the State with ASI Hawa Singh, PS Nihal Vihar CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2507.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.145/2016 under Sections 376/417/497 IPC at Police station Nihal Vihar. Allegations in the FIR are that the complainant, who is already married, was unhappy with her husband and the petitioner became her friend and subsequently on false promise of marriage he made physical relationship with her. She has reiterated the statement in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as well as in her deposition before the court.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the statement it is appare...
Sona Corporation India pvt.ltd vs.ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2018
$-13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. h July, 2018 + O.M.P.(I)(COMM.) 249/2018 SONA CORPORATION INDIA PVT.LTD ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.A.K. Singla, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Rahul Shukla, Adv. versus INGRAM MICRO INDIA PVT. LTD. & ANR....... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Sudhir Kumar and Ms.Ashna Abrol, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA NAVIN CHAWLA, J.(Oral) 1. This petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been filed by the petitioner inter-alia praying for the following reliefs: (i) Restrain the Respondent No.1 from acting in terms of the Notice dated 30.04.2018 illegally terminating the Lease Deed dated 18.06.2013; (ii) Direct the Respondent No.1 to pay the... Petitioner Rs.21,24,000/-, being the lease rent for the months of March to May, 2018 due under the registered Lease Deed dated 18.06.2013 along with interest at the rate of 21% p.a. from due date, i.e. 07.03.2018; (iii) Dir...
Icici Bank Limited vs.satish Kumar Sehrawat
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RSA1712017 & CM No.23803/2017 (for stay) Date of decision:25. h July, 2018 ICICI BANK LIMITED ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Punit K. Bhalla, Adv. Versus SATISH KUMAR SEHRAWAT ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Kanwar Udai Bhan Singh, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the order [dated 24th May, 2017 in RCA-DJ-17/ 2017 of the Court of Additional District Judge, New Delhi District]. of dismissal of the First Appeal under Section 96 of the CPC preferred by the appellant as a consequence of refusal to condone the delay in preferring the First Appeal against the ex parte judgment and decree [dated 24th November, 2015 in CS No.171/2015 (Unique ID No.02403C0187732015) of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, New Delhi District]. in favour of the respondent / plaintiff / decree-holder of recovery of Rs.64,829/- with interest and of injunction, direct...
M/S Yves Saint Laurent Parfums vs.m/s Smart Collection & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2018
$~24 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision :25th July, 2018 M/S YVES SAINT LAURENT PARFUMS CS (COMM) 220/2018 & I.A. 19615/2014 ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. S. K. Bansal, Mr. Pankaj Kumar & Mr. Kapil Kumar Giri, Advocates (M-9810438450). M/S SMART COLLECTION & ORS versus ..... Defendants Through: Mr. H.P. Singh, Advocate for D-1 to 6&8 (M-9810008116). CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(ORAL) 1. The Plaintiff M/s. Yves Saint Laurent Parfums S.A. (hereinafter, Plaintiff), is a French corporation and the owner of the trademark YVES SAINT LAURENT and YSL. The Plaintiff Company deals with a line of cosmetic and beauty products. The Plaintiffs products are claimed to be sold in more than 200 stores across the globe and has an annual turnover of 270 million Dollars. In India, the marks YVES SAINT LAURENT and YSL are registered both in word form and logo form in several classes including classes 3, 9, 14, 16, 18, 25, as stated in paragraph 6 of the p...
Veeru Parshad Gupta vs.jogeshwari Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.586/2018 % VEERU PARSHAD GUPTA25h July, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Ms. A. Dwivedi and Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocates. versus JOGESHWARI DEVI ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. Nos. 29351/2018 and 29353/2018 (for exemptions) 1. Exemptions allowed, subject to just exceptions. C.Ms. stand disposed of. RFA No.586/2018 and C.M. Appl. Nos. 29352/2018 (for additional evidence) & 29350/2018 (for stay) 2. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant in the suit impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 18.4.2018 by which the trial RFA No.586/2018 Page 1 of 4 court has decreed the suit for partition filed by the sister against the appellant/defendant/brother. Partition has been granted giving each of the parties 50% ownership interest in the property bearing No.219, Block D-...
Manpreet Singh Bhatia & Ors. Vs.the State & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2018
$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:25. 07.2018 CRL.M.C. 3660/2018 MANPREET SINGH BHATIA & ORS. ........ Petitioners versus THE STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Ms. Koplin K. Kandhari with Mr. S.C. Duggal, Advocates. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners : For the Respondent: CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Kamal Kumar Ghai, APP for State. SI Vikram Singh, PS Rajouri Garden. Complainant in person. JUDGMENT2507.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.517/2013 under Sections 498A/4IPC, Police Station Rajouri Garden, based on a settlement.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.4 Mr. Ponty Singh, who is a permanent resident of Singapore and has filed his affidavit in support of the petition, could not be CRL.M.C. 3660/2018 Page 1 of 4 present today as he had to travel back to Singapore. Learned counsel for the petitioners prays that he may be granted...
Ajay Maini vs.state (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2018
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 983/2018 & Crl.M.B.706/2018 AJAY MAINI ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, Ms.Hemlata Kharayat, Mr.Shekhar Pathak and Mr.Shailesh Pandey, Advocates versus STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Meenakshi Chauhan, APP for the State with SI Subhash Chandra, PS Model Town Mr.Manoj Kr.Ohri, Sr.Advocate along with Mr.Nawab Singh jaglan and Mr.Abhimanyu Singh, Advocates for the complainant CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA % ORDER2507.2018 By this petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR1 No.111/2017 under SectionsIPC registered at PS Model Town, New Delhi on the complaint of Sushil Kumar Goel.2. Sushil Kumar Goel in his complaint stated that he was running a finance company in the name of M/s.DPA Finance Private Limited having its registered office at D-13A/30, Model Town-II, Delhi. In the year 2014 petitioner came into his contact and developed friendly relations...
Ajay Kumar vs.state ( Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2018
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:25. 07.2018 BAIL APPLN. 1012/2018 AJAY KUMAR versus STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Mr. Rajiv Khosla, Adv. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent: CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for the State. SI Kailash Kumar, PS Mangol Puri. JUDGMENT2507.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.355/2018 under Sections 451/5IPC, PS Manogl Puri. Subsequently Sections 452 IPC and 30 Arms Act have been added. Allegations in the FIR are that the petitioner had gone into the shop of the complainant and thereafter threatened with a weapon. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner 2. BAIL APPLN. 1012/2018 Page 1 of 3 has been falsely implicated and the CCTV footage which has been seized by the prosecution clearly shows that the petitioner had not gone there with the intent...
M/S Giorgio Armani s.p.a. Vs.m/s Smart Collection & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2018
$~21 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision :25th July, 2018 M/S GIORGIO ARMANI S.P.A. CS (COMM) 208/2018 & I.A. 14798/2014 ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. S. K. Bansal, Mr. Pankaj Kumar & Mr. Kapil Kumar Giri, Advocates (M-9810438450). M/S SMART COLLECTION & ORS versus ..... Defendants Through: Mr. H. P. Singh, Advocate for D-1 to 6&8 (M-9810008116). CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(ORAL) 1. The Plaintiff M/s. Giorgio Armani S.P.A., is an Italian company and the owner of the trademarks ARMANI and GIORGIO ARMANI. The company was founded by Mr. Giorgio Armani, in 1975 for garments, but thereafter expanded into a range of mens products like fragrances, watches, eyewear, cosmetics, and various other accessories. For fragrances, cosmetics and other beauty products, the Plaintiff has an agreement with M/s LOreal SA France, as per which LOreal is the licensee. It is claimed that the Plaintiffs products are globally renowned and have attained distinct...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »