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.
Sanchit Kapoor vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
#63,70,71 & 72 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:29. 08.2018 W.P.(C) 8207/2018 PRIYANK SHRARMA versus ........ Petitioner UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS W.P.(C) 8247/2018 MAHESH KUMAR (MINOR) THROUGH HIS FATHER BHOOP SINGH GURJAR ........ Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS W.P.(C) 8248/2018 SANCHIT KAPOOR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. W.P.(C) 8252/2018 KARTIK SINGH SAWHNEY versus ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS W.P.(C) 8207/2018, W.P.(C) 8247/2018, W.P.(C) 8248/2018 & W.P.(C) 8252/2018 Page 1 of 6 Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. Manu Beri, Mr. Prasenjit Keswani and Mr. Raghvendra Pratap Singh, Advocates in W.P.(C) 8207/2018 Mr. Jeetender Gupta, Advocate in W.P.(C) 8247/2018, 8248/2018 & 8252/20 Mr. Ruchir Mishra, and Mr. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocates for UOI Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal and M...
Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax, Delhi (East) vs.ashutosh Metal ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~83 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CEAC292017 Date of decision :29. 08.2018 COMMISSIONER OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, DELHI (EAST) ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus ASHUTOSH METAL INDUSTRIES ..... Respondent Through: Mr. V.S. Negi and Mr. Satish Chander Kaul, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL) % The questions of law framed in this case read as follows:-""(1) Whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in rejecting and not taking into consideration computer printouts and holding them as inadmissible for failure to meet the conditions specified in Section 36B of the Central Excise Act?. CEAC292017 Page 1 of 12 (2) Whether the decision of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal is contrary to facts and perverse?. (3) Whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was in excluding ...
Asha Devi and Anr. Vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
#83 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:29. 08.2018 W.P.(C) 9094/2018 ASHA DEVI AND ANR. versus ........ Petitioners GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. Pardeep Gupta, Mr. Parinav Gupta, Ms. Mansi Gupta, Mr. Wazir Singh Malik and Mr. Moazzam Ali, Advocates. : Ms. Jyoti Taneja, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 & 4/GNCTD. Mr. Ram Kumar, Standing Counsel along with Mr. Sushil Kumar, Advocates for respondent Nos. 2, 4 & 5/NDMC. Mr. Arjun Pant, Advocate for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) 1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, prays as follows: i)... RESPONDENTS No.1 & 2 be directed to make the payment/compensation in respect of the land which has been forcibly taken over by the respondents for construction/widening of road out of plot No.RZ-52, Sayed Nangloi, i.e. road Meera Bag...
Mohd. Shahid vs.state ( Govt. Of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:29. 08.2018 BAIL APPLN. 1933/2018 MOHD. SHAHID ........ Petitioner versus STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Abhinav Sarup Sharma, Advocate. Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State. ASI Satyender Kumar, PS IP Estate. ..... Respondent JUDGMENT2908.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks regular bail in case FIR No.152/2018 under Sections 308/323/4IPC, Police Station I.P. Estate. The petitioner has been in custody since 02.07.2018.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the complainant is in the business of scrap dealing and on the day of the incident, the petitioner, BAIL APPLN. 1933/2018 Page 1 of 3 who is also engaged in the scrap business, adjoining to the shop of the complainant brought a truck, which was parked allegedly obstructing the business premises of the complainant...
M/S Bhasin Infotech & Infrastructure Pvt Ltd & Ors vs.naresh Kumar Dua
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA No.446/2018 % M/S BHASIN INFOTECH & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD & ORS29h August, 2018 ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Madhur Gulshan Sapra, Adv. (9810955755) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Neeraj Tyagi, Advocate (9810114261) versus NARESH KUMAR DUA CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. At the time of issuing notice in this appeal on 25.5.2018, the following order was passed:-"1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 CPC is filed by the defendants in the suit impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 23.1.2018 by which the trial court has decreed the suit for recovery filed by the respondent/plaintiff for a sum of Rs.17 lacs alongwith interest at 9% per annum.2. Learned counsel for the appellants argues that admittedly the contract of the respondent/plaintiff was only with the appellant no.1 RFA No.800/2016 Page 1 of 3 and there was no contract with the appell...
Sunita Arora & Ors. Vs.shashi Bala
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.713/2018 + % SUNITA ARORA & ORS. 29TH AUGUST, 2018 ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate (M. No.9811770164). versus Through: ..... Respondent SHASHI BALA CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Nos.34779-80/2018(exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M.s stand disposed of. C.M. No.34781/2018 (for condonation of delay) 2. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 120 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. C.M. stands disposed of. RFA No.713/2018 Page 1 of 12 +RFA No.713/2018 and C.M. No.34778/2018(stay) 3. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the plaintiff in the suit (along with the defendants who supported the appellant no.1/plaintiff) whereby trial court has only partially decreed the suit for partition filed by the appellant no.1/plaintiff. Suit f...
Sh. Virender Singh vs.south Delhi Municipal Corporation (Sdmc) and Ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9063/2018 SH. VIRENDER SINGH versus ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Anuj Aggarwal, Adv. with Mr.Kshitij Arora, Adv . SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (SDMC) AND ORS. Through Mr.Arun Birbal, Adv. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI % 1. ORDER2908.2018 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing an order dated 12th March, 2018, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, whereby OA No.2813/2015 filed by him seeking directions to the respondent/South Delhi Municipal Corporation, to appoint him on a regular basis as a Safai Karamchari w.e.f. 24th September, 2018, i.e., the date of his initial engagement as a daily wager, along with consequential benefits, has been rejected with a direction that the respondents shall consider the petitioners case for regularization along with others as per his seniority and as per the extant Rules...
Ganesh vs.state of Nct of Delhi & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:29.08.2018 CRL.M.C. 2025/2018 & Crl. M.A. 7165/2018 GANESH STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. versus ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent : Mr. M.K. Perwez and Mr. K.L. D. Vinober, Advs. with petitioner in person. Ms. Neelam Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with SI Vipin Kumar, PS Kalyan Puri Mr. Pawan Chaudhary, Advocate. for R-2 with R-2 in person. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2908.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.364/2016 under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short) registered at Police Station Kalyan Puri, East Delhi, based on a settlement.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the petitioner in an inebriated state was abusing and shouting in the lane outside the house of the complainant and when the complainant objected, the petitioner is CRL.M.C. 2025/2018 P...
Jeetender Sharma and Anr. Vs.land and Building Department
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) 6207/2018 JEETENDER SHARMA AND ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. N.S. Dalal and Mr. Amit Dhankhar, Advocates Versus LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) 1. Impugned order of 21st November, 2017 (Annexure P-1) rejects petitioners application for allotment of alternate plot in lieu of acquired land on the ground that the requisite documents have not been supplied.2. Learned counsel for petitioners draws attention of this Court to a copy of petitioners letter of 11th April, 2016 (Annexure P-5 colly), which reveals that the requisite documents have been supplied to respondent. It is also submitted on behalf of petitioners that the documents, as referred to in the impugned order, shall also be made available to respondents within four weeks from today and if there is still any...
Bhagyanagar India Ltd vs.bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-29-2018
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. h August, 2018. + EX.P. 53/2014 & EX.APPL.(OS) 437/2014 BHAGYANAGAR INDIA LTD ..... Decree Holder Through: Mr.Siddharth Gautam, Advocate (M- 9810202212). versus BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD Through: None. ..... Judgement Debtor CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) 1. The Decree Holder seeks execution of the judgement and decree dated 9th July 2003. The operative portion of the said decree reads as under: This suit coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of counsel for the parties with Mr. Yogesh Kr. Nagar, Asst. Manager ( WLL) BSNL., C.O. New Delhi as aforesaid, it is ordered that a decree be and the same is hereby passed in terms of two circulars of the respondent being applicable to the plaintiff, i.e., circular No.13-1/2008-WLL/Cores/28 dated 07.08.2009 read with a clarification No.13- 1/2008-WLL/Cores/33 dated 16th September, 2009 (Copy enclosed) 2. Learned counsel...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »