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.
Rattan Polychem Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs.reliable Insupacks Private Limited ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2018
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgement decided on:28. 08.2018 ARB.P. 489/2018 + RATTAN POLYCHEM PVT. LTD. & ANR. Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar and Mr. Hetish ........ Petitioners Raj Singh, Advs. RELIABLE INSUPACKS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None for R-2 versus Mr. Vinay Shukla, Adv. for R-3 to 6 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.2. 3. The petitioners pray for appointment of an Arbitrator. Notice in this petition was issued on 13.7.2018, when on behalf of respondent no.2, Ms. Parul Agrawal accepted notice. While on behalf of respondent nos. 3 to 6, Mr. Shukla accepted notice.4. An opportunity was given to the aforementioned counsel to file their replies in the matter.5. 6. Unfortunately, respondent no.2 is not represented today. Insofar as respondents no.2 to 6 are concerned, no reply has been filed, though Mr. Shukla is pres...
pr.commissioner of Income Tax-6 vs.national Housing Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2018
$~13 to 18 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI INCOME TAX APPEAL Nos. 625/2017, 636/2017, 642/2017, 667/2017, 672/2017, 673/2017 Date of decision:28. h August, 2018 PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Deepak Anand, Jr. Standing Counsel for Revenue. versus NATIONAL HOUSING BANK ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rohit Jain and Mr. Aniket D. Agarwal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR * + SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): These appeals by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) assail the common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) dated 20th February, 2017 in the case of National Housing Bank (respondent- assessee bank, for short) for the Assessment Years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 and 2009-10.2. The respondent-assessee bank is wholly owned by the Reserve Bank of India. ITA No.625/2017+connected ...
Moin a Qureshi vs.commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-Ii and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.4824/2017 Reserved on :2. d May, 2018 Date of decision:28. h August, 2018 MOIN A QURESHI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K. Handoo, Mr. Yoginder Handoo, Mr. Aditya Chaudhary, Mr. Manish Shukla & Mr. Nishant Kumar, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-II AND ANOTHER Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing ........ RESPONDENTS Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR CHANDER SHEKHAR, J.: This writ petition by Moin A. Qureshi (the petitioner for short) assails the order dated 12th May, 2017 under Section 245D(2C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) whereby the Income Tax Settlement Commission, W.P.(C) No.4824/2017 Page 1 of 52 New Delhi (ITSC, for short) has rejected the settlement application filed by the petitioner as invalid.2. This is the third round of litigation in the High Court from orders passed by the ITSC. The petitioner had earlier...
Subrata Brahma vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2018
Judgment delivered on:28. 08.2018 CRL.M.C. 3389/2018 $~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + SUBRATA BRAHMA STATE versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners : For the... RESPONDENTS: Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Advocate. Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, APP for the State. SI Ramesh Chander, Crime Branch. Mr. Anil Rakhra, Advocate for the complainant. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2808.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) CRL.M.C. Crl.M.A.12276/2018 (for placing the petition as it is) 3389/2018 Crl.M.A.12274/2018 & (stay), 1. The petitioner impugns order dated 06.07.2018, whereby, the application of the petitioner under Section 207 Cr.P.C. for supply of copies of demand promissory notes has been rejected with costs of Rs.10,000/- and with an observation that the petitioner/accused has adopted dilatory tactics to delay the proceedings.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the respondent complainant is ...
Randhir @ Malang vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2018
$~ 50 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL. A. 456/2017 Date of Decision:28. 08.2018 RANDHIR @ MALANG Through: STATE Versus Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Neeraj Bhardwaj, Adv. ..... Respondent Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The appellant has been produced pursuant to production warrants issued in terms of order dated 07.07.2018 from the Central Jail No.4, Tihar, New Delhi. The nominal roll in terms of order dated 07.07.2018 has also been received from the Superintendent of Prison, Central Jail No.4, Tihar, New Delhi indicating to the effect that as on 20.08.2018, the appellant had undergone five years, four months and two days of incarceration qua the impugned sentence awarded vide order dated 30.03.2017 in the State Case No.51/2/13 of a period of 13 years of Rigorous Imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 6 r/w Section 5 (m) of the POCSO Act, 2012 and was sentenced to a further period of Rigorous Im...
Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd. Vs.gaurav Kumar & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: August 28, 2018 + MAC.APP. 95/2018 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. A.K. Soni and Mr.Pavan Kumar, Advocates versus + MAC.APP. 348/2018 GAURAV KUMAR & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. P.S. Goindi, Advocate 1. GAURAV KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. P.S. Goindi, Advocate versus SATISH KUMAR & ORS. (RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD) .....Respondents Through: Mr. A.K. Soni and Mr.Pavan Kumar, Advocates for respondent- Insurer CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) Impugned Award of 23rd November, 2017 grants compensation of `63,56,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum to injured-Gaurav, aged 27 years, on account of grievous injury suffered by him in a vehicular accident, which took place on 7th September, 2009. MAC.APPs. 95/2018 & 348/2018 Page 1 of 8 2. In the above-captioned first appeal, Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Insurer) seeks reduction in ...
M/S. Chandok Machineries vs.m/s. S. N. Sunderson & Co
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI O.M.P. (COMM.) 321/2017 Reserved on:28. h May, 2018 Date of decision :28. h August, 2018 M/S. CHANDOK MACHINERIES ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Avi Singh, Mr.Shashank Dixit, Mr.Katyayini & Ms.Purnima Malik, Advs. versus M/S. S. N. SUNDERSON & CO ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Jayant K. Mehta, Mr.Pulkit Agarwal & Mr.Shubhankar, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA1 This 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 12th June, 2017 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal consisting of three Arbitrators in Arbitration Case No.20017/ANL adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the two Memorandum of Understanding(s) dated 1st September, 2014.2. By way of the Impugned Award, the Arbitral Tribunal has inter alia directed the petitioner to pay to ...
Preeti Khurana and Ors vs.state of Nct of Delhi and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2018
$~13 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 4452/2015 Decided on:28. h August, 2018 PREETI KHURANA AND ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Mohit Kukreja, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State with ASI Aman Kumar, PS CAW Cell Nanak Pura CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. On 14.05.2010, the second respondent had instituted criminal complaint case (CC no.152/2/14) in the court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi (ACMM) alleging offences punishable under Sections 454, 457, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) having been committed by the petitioners. On the basis of pre-summoning inquiry, they were summoned as accused persons by order dated 28.01.2015 of the Metropolitan Magistrate.2. The said order was challenged before the court of Sessions in Criminal Revision Petition No.2which was, however, dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge by his order date...
Mukesh Kumar vs.manoranjan & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:28. h August, 2018 CRL.M.C. 2004/2009 MUKESH KUMAR ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. H.D. Birdi, Advocate with petitioner in person. versus MANORANJAN & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Represented by: Mr. Sanjay Jain, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sharat Kapoor and Ms. Sneh Suman, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. No.15307/2017 (seeking certificate for leave to appeal) 1. By this application under Articles 134(1) (c) and 134A of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks certificate for leave to appeal before the Honble Supreme Court against the judgment dated 7th July, 2017 passed by this Court in Crl.M.C. No.2004/2009 and Crl.M.A. No.14768/2016.2. Brief background of the case is that the petitioner filed a complaint being Crl. Complaint No.1037/1/06 titled as Mukesh Kumar vs. Dr.Manoranjan and others, before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate seeking summoning of the respondents No....
University of Delhi & Ors. Vs.adarsh Raj Singh & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. 08.2018 CM APPL. 34885/2018 & 34886/2018 In LPA4432018 UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. for University of Delhi. versus ADARSH RAJ SINGH & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Preet Pal Singh, Adv. for BCI. Mr. Vivek Chib with Ms. Ruchira Goel & Ms. Pracheta Kar, Advs. for applicants. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO RAJENDER MENON, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL): CM APPL. 34886/2018 (for Impleadment) 1. This application has been filed by 15 applicants who claim to be students enrolled in the three academic sessions for LL.B. Course as are indicated in Para 1 of the application. They are aggrieved by the act of the University in not permitting them to take up further examination, on account of shortage of attendance, thereby, detaining them and putting their name in the list of detained candidates.2. It is the case of the applicants that the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »