Delhi Court August 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.
Neeraj Singal vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + NEERAJ SINGAL W.P.(CRL) 2453/2018 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Ms. Ranjana Gawai, Mr. Arshdeep Singh, Mr. Hemant Shah, Mr. Aditya Pujari, Ms. Anusha Nagarajan, Ms. Vasudha Sen, Mr. Himanshu Gupta, Mr. Sumit Bindal, Ms. Shivika Singh, and Mr. Akshat Gupta, Advocates. Roy versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Through: Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG ........ RESPONDENTS and Ms. Maninder Acharya, ASG with Mr. Sanjeev Narula, CGSC, Mr. Amit Mahajan, Mr. Narindra Mann, Mr. Kavinder Gill, Mr. Arunendra Singh, Mr. Abhishek Ghai, Mr. Rajat Gava, Mr. Shravan Kumar Shukla, Ms. Mallika Hiramath, Mr. Harshul Choudhary, Mr. Sood, Mr. Viplav Acharya with Ms. Mann Kapila, Sr. Asst. Director, Mr. P.C. Maurya, Addl. Director, Mr. S.S. Sahnai, Addl. Director & Mr. Ajeet Srivastava, Advocates for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 Mr. Satish Aggarwala & Mr. Vinee...
Sh. Chunni Manoj Kumar & Ors. Vs.state (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~58 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 4372/2018 Judgment delivered on:29. 08.2018 SH. CHUNNI MANOJ KUMAR & ORS. ........ Petitioners versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Ms. Ritu Goyal, Advocate. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners : For the... RESPONDENTS: CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State. ASI Jai Kishan, PS Mangol Puri. JUDGMENT2908.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) Crl.M.A.30911/2018 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 4378/2018 1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.94/2016 under Sections 498A/4IPC read with Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mangolpuri.2. The subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord. CRL.M.C. 4372/2018 Page 1 of 3... Petitioner No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2.... Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the respondent No.2.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner...
Swatantra Arora vs.rajendra Kumar Bali
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. h August, 2018. C.R.P. 153/2018 & CMs No.30324/2018 (for stay) & 30325/2018 (for condonation of 54 days delay in filing the appeal) SWATANTRA ARORA ....... Petitioner Through: Mr. Jitendra Nath Pathak, Adv. Versus ..... Respondent Through: None. RAJENDRA KUMAR BALI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 On 31st July, 2018, when this petition came up first before this Court, the following order was passed: 3. This Revision Petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the order [dated 1st March, 2018 in CC No.23/2017 of the Court of Judge, Family Court, East District]. of dismissal of the application under Order VII Rule11 of the CPC filed by the petitioner wife for rejection of a Petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed by the respondent husband for restitution of conjugal rights. Rejection of the petition for restitution of the conjugal 4. rights was sought ...
Kavita vs.indian Oil Corporation Ltd & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. h August, 2018 + LPA4962018, CM No.35177/2018 (stay) KAVITA Through: Mr. Gaurang Kanth, Adv. ..... Appellant versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms.Malanarayan, Adv. with Ms.Neha Dawak & Ms.Madhumanti Ghosh, Advs. for R- 1/IOCL Mohd. Sajid, Adv. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT Rajendra Menon, Chief Justice (Oral) C.Ms.No.35178-79/2018 (exemptions) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions LPA4962018 1. Seeking exception to an order passed by the writ Court on 14.08.2018 in the matter of allotment of retail outlet to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Letter of Intent (LOI) holders, the petitioner has filed the present appeal. The learned writ Court having dismissed the writ petition, the petitioner is before this Court. Various averments are made in this appeal and we find that the learned writ Court in detail has adverted to various sub...
Phool Kanwar vs.government of Nct of Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: August 29, 2018 + W.P.(C) 9085/2018 & C.M. 34973/2018 1. PHOOL KANWAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Mohit Kumar Sharma, Advocate Versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ..... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Devesh Singh, Addl. Standing Counsel (Civil) with Ms. Sukriti Ghai, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Ejectment order was passed against petitioner in proceedings under the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 on 25th July, 1980.... Petitioners counsel submits that the said order has not been implemented against petitioner and petitioner is still in possession of the subject land. It is also submitted that no construction has been raised on the subject land, which is agricultural land.2. It is the case of petitioner that on 29th August, 2017, petitioner came to know about vesting of subject land in gaon sabha and soon thereafter, an application was filed for setting aside of the ex parte orders passed way back...
Jyotika Mahajan vs.central Board of Secondary Education & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
#68 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:29. 08.2018 W.P.(C) 1892/2018 JYOTIKA MAHAJAN ........ Petitioner versus CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. Sanjay M. Tripathi and Ms. Anu Gupta, Advocates : Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate for R-1 & R-2 Mr. S.S. Tripathi, PGT (Mathematics) for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) 1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been instituted praying as follows:-"W.P.(C) 1892/2018 Page 1 of 4 a) b) quash the of decision Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to respondent No.1 communicated by the respondent No.2 vide letter dated 03.10.2017 and 03.01.2018 bearing No.A-1- 821/2015; and/or Pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. This ...
Garima Jain vs.raj Kumar Singhal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~23 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"29th August, 2018 CRL. M.C. 1444/2016 & Crl. M.A. 6171/2016 GARIMA JAIN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. A.K. Jain, Adv. versus RAJ KUMAR SINGHAL Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is facing criminal prosecution in criminal complaint case (No.259/1/15) which was instituted by the respondent on the allegations of offence under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 having been committed qua the cheque statedly of the value of Rupees Three lakhs. The complainant was concededly examined as witness and tendered for cross-examination. The petitioner as accused later changed counsel who moved an application for recall of the said witness under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) to the effect that the cross- examination conducted was deficient and certain further questions respecting the defence of the accused had not been put. This pra...
Narender Kumar Gupta vs.anita Gupta & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~49 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:29. h August, 2018 RFA(OS) 62/2018 NARENDER KUMAR GUPTA ..... Appellant Through: Mr Sanjay Mishra, Adv versus ANITA GUPTA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Nemo CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM No.34978/2018 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. CM No.34976/2018 (delay in filing) 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the preliminary decree passed by a learned Single Judge of this court dated 12.11.2014. Along with the appeal an application being CM No.34976/2018 has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 1513 days in filing the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the delay has occurred on account of bona-fide reasons and not on account of any carelessness or inaction on the part of the appellant. Learned counsel RFA(OS) 62/2018 Page 1...
Smt. Krishna Bhoj & Anr. Vs.state (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % BAIL APPLN. 1058/2018 Judgment delivered on:29. 08.2018 SMT. KRISHNA BHOJ & ANR. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Versus ........ Petitioners ..... Respondent Mr. Amit Kumar Singh and Mr. Amith J., Advs. : Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA : Mr. Neelam Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with W/SI Davinder Kaur Mr. B.N. Singhvi, Adv. for complainant % ORDER2908.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioners seek anticipatory Bail in case FIR No.307 of 2016 under Sections 498-A/406 of the IPC Police Station Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi.2.... Petitioner No.1 is the mother-in-law of complainant and petitioner No.2 is brother-in-law of complainant.3. The allegations in the FIR are that the husband of the prosecutrix after marriage did not treat her well and thereafter has abandoned her. The allegations against the petitioners are that they are not disclosing the BAIL APP...
Devender Singh vs.m/s Malik Buildcon Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.800/2016 % DEVENDER SINGH29h August, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajiv Yadav, Advocate (Mobile No.9811017900). versus M/S MALIK BUILDCON PVT LTD ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) RFA No.800/2016 and C.M. Appl. No.37766/2016 (for stay) 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the plaintiff in the suit impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 30.3.2016 by which the trial court has dismissed the suit for specific performance and possession filed by the appellant/plaintiff with respect to shop No.S-17, Buildcon Plaza, Plot No.6, Pocket 5, Sector 12, Dwarka, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the suit property). Trial court has dismissed the suit for specific performance essentially on two counts, with the first count RFA No.800/2016 Page 1 of 11 being that the Agreement to Sell b...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »