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.
Intarvo Technologies Ltd (Previously Known as Rt Outsourcing Services ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2018
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.667/2014 23rd August, 2018 INTARVO TECHNOLOGIES LTD (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS RT OUTSOURCING SERVICES LTD) THR ITS DIRECTOR ..... Appellant A R PRINTER POINT THR IS PRORIETOR Through: None. versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Somesh Yadav, proxy No.(Mobile Advocate 8826264455). CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 18.9.2014 whereby the trial court has dismissed the leave to defend application filed by the appellant/defendant in an Order XXXVII CPC suit.2. A reading of the plaint shows that the suit is not based upon a dishonoured negotiable instrument or upon a written agreement containing a liquidated liability. All that is stated in the plaint is that RFA No.667/2014 Page 1 of 3 respondent/plaintiff supplied cabling services to the appe...
Balram Arora vs.the State (govt.of Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2018
$~1 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 992/2018 BALRAM ARORA ........ Petitioner versus THE STATE (GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI)& ANR........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent: : Mr. Markandey Gupta, Advocate Mr.Raghuvinder Verma, APP with SI Karan Singh, P.S.Lodhi Colony. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA % JUDGMENT2308.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.331/2006 under Sections 1. 406/498A IPC, Police Station Lodhi Colony.2. The subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord.... Petitioner No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2.3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have settled their disputes and the terms of settlement were recorded before the Mediation Centre, Saket Courts on 09.08.2017. The parties have already been divorced by way of a decree of divorce by mutual consent, passed on 04.07.2018.4. It is further agreed between the parties that th...
Shekhar Pal Sharma vs.union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2018
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:23. 8.2018 + ARB.P. 530/2018 & I.A. No.8743/2018 1. SHEKHAR PAL SHARMA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Adv. along with the petitioner-in-person. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Adv. for Mr. Somvir Singh, Chief Administrative Officer), CAT. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) This is a petition filed in which, the following substantive prayers have been sought: a) Dismiss the appointment of officers of respondent no.2 (NDMA), namely Shri R.K. Mishra and Shri D.N. Sharma, as Arbitrators for the purpose of independent judicial proceedings; b) Appoint Presiding Arbitrator to the Arbitral Tribunal of three Arbitrators from the judicial side panel of this Hon'ble Court; c) Remunerations for each of the three Arbitrators may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court; d) Direct the respondents to bear entire expenses towards Arbitration proceedings as th...
Hughes Communication India Limited & Ors. Vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2018
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:23. 8.2018 + ARB.P. 532/2018 & I.A. No.9818/2018 1. HUGHES COMMUNICATION INDIA LIMITED & ORS. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Ankur Mahindro with Ms. Aarzoo Aneja, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Mukesh Kr. Tiwari with Mr. Sanju Kr. Saxena and Mr. R. Mishra, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) This is a petition whereby the relief sought is that this Court appoint an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter referred to as 1996 Act).2. It is not disputed before me, a fact which is recorded in the previous order that the petitioner had filed a suit in which an application under Section 8 of 1996 Act had been filed by the respondent. In view of the respondent moving an application under Section 8 of the 1996 Act, the suit was terminated.3. It is in this background that the petitioner has approached this Court. Counsel fo...
M/S Himachal Emta Power Limited vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2018
$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5537/2018 & CM Nos. 21583/2018 & 33487/2018 M/S HIMACHAL EMTA POWER LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through: Mr Abhimanyu Bhandari with Ms Kartika Sharma and Mr Cheitanya Madan, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr Amit Mahajan, CGSC for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % VIBHU BAKHRU, J.ORDER2308.2018 1. The petitioner M/S Himachal Emta Power Limited (hereafter HEPL) has filed the present petition under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, impugning the provisional attachment order dated 29.12.2017 (hereafter the impugned order) issued by the Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate (respondent no.2 hereafter the ED) under Section 5(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereafter the PML Act).2. By the impugned order, the ED has provisionally attached: (i) investment made by HEPL in M/s Gaurangdih Coal Ltd. (hereafter GCL) W.P.(C) 5537/2018 Pa...
Rakesh Nanda vs.today Homes Pvt Ltd & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2018
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:13. 10.2017 Judgment delivered on:23. 08.2018 + W.P.(CRL) 1645/2013 and CRL.M.A. 2775/2014 & 19472/2014 ARUN SAXENA & ANR. ........ Petitioners versus TODAY HOMES & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD. & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS + W.P.(CRL) 1660/2013 and CRL.M.A. 2773/2014 & 19110/2014 HARBANS LAL SARIN ........ Petitioner versus TODAY HOMES & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD. & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS + W.P.(CRL) 1664/2013 and CRL.M.A. 2774/2014 RAKESH NANDA versus TODAY HOMES PVT LTD & ORS ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS W.P.(CRL) 1645/2013 & all connected matters Page 1 of 66 + W.P.(CRL) 1679/2013 and CRL.M.A. 2770/2014 & 19111/2014 UMESH BHATIA & ANR ........ Petitioners versus TODAY HOMES & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS + W.P.(CRL) 1666/2013 and CRL.M.A. 2738/2014 HARI OM GUPTA versus TODAY HOMES PVT LTD ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent + W.P.(CRL) 1678/2013 and CRL.M.A. 2771/2014 & 19113/2014 RAVI GULA...
Prince Sharma @ Prince vs.the State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2018
$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:23.08.2018 CRL.M.C. 4235/2018 PRINCE SHARMA @ PRINCE versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner(s) : For the Respondent(s): Mr.Gaurav Kochar, Adv. Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Addl. PP for the State with ASI Amar Chand, P.S.Krishna Nagar. Mr.Nitin Arora, Advocate. for R-2. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2308.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) CM Appl.30473/2018 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 4235/2018 1.... Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.33/2018 under Sections 354/324/323/341/506 IPC at Police Station Krishna Nagar.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the petitioner who is the neighbour of the complainant had proposed to her and when she refused, misbehaved with her and caused her injury. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have 3. CRL.M.C. ...
Institute of Geo Informatics (P) Ltd vs.indian Oil Corporation Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment pronounced on:23. 08.2018 Judgment reserved on:31. 07.2018 FAO(OS)(COMM) 197/2017 INSTITUTE OF GEO INFORMATICS (P) LTD Through: Mr.Jai Savla and Mr. Rajpal Singh, Advs. ..... Appellant versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Abhinav Vashisht, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Nishant Menon, Ms.Reeta Mishra, Ms.Priya and Mr. Shafiq Ahmed, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.CHAWLA JUDGMENT S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.For detailed judgment see FAO(OS)(COMM) No.189/2017. S. RAVINDRA BHAT (JUDGE) A.K.CHAWLA (JUDGE) AUGUST23 2018...
Madan Pal vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A.754/2003 Reserved on:9. h August, 2018 Decided on:23. d August, 2018 MADAN PAL STATE .....Appellant Through: Ms. Ritu Gauba, Advocate. versus ....Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VINOD GOEL Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: JUDGMENT1This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 27th September 2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi (hereinafter trial Court) in SC No.35/1998 arising out of FIR No.419/1997 registered at PS Nabi Karim whereby the Appellant herein was convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC. It also seeks to assail the order on sentence dated 30th September 2003 whereby he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-; and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.2. It must be noted at the outset that by an order dated 13th January 2004, the sentence of the Appellant was ...
Shri Jai Bhagwan vs.govt. Of n.c.t. Of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * Date of Order: August 23, 2018 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Naresh K. Daksh, Advocate SHRI JAI BHAGWAN + W.P.(C) 8488/2018 & C.M. 32608/2018 GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI Versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) In the first round of litigation, petitioner had challenged rejection 1. of application filed by Shiv Charan for allotment of alternate plot in lieu of acquired land and the said writ petition was dismissed on 21st July, 2016 vide order Annexure P-10 while observing that Chhotu Ram, who was entitled to apply for allotment of alternate plot, had not applied for allotment and so, rejection of application of his son-Shiv Charan was justified. Review sought by petitioner was not pressed with liberty to take appropriate action, as advised in law.2. Counsel for petitioner submits that review was sought on the ground that from information...
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »