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

Try free for 7 days Semantic AI Search

Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.

Aug 23 2018

Hari Om Gupta vs.today Homes Pvt Ltd

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...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 23 2018

Meenakshi vs.praveen Rajora

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Aug-23-2018

$~22 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 4705/2016 MEENAKSHI Decided on:23. d August, 2018 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Malaya Chand, Advocate versus PRAVEEN RAJORA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sahil Munjal and Mr. R.S. Goswami, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner was married to the first respondent on 31.10.2009. From out of their cohabitation, a child took birth on 30.11.2011. It is stated that the petitioner was constrained to leave the matrimonial home with her child on 13.02.2012. The first respondent (husband) sued for divorce sometime in 2013-2014. Subsequent to that event, the petitioner (wife) presented a complaint (CC no.178/6/14) in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate invoking Section 12 read with Sections 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, Domestic Violence Act) seeking various reliefs. Crl. M.C. No.4705/2016 Page 1 of 6 2. The respondent (husband), who ...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 23 2018

Jai Prakash vs.sub- Registrar Iv-A & Anr

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Aug-23-2018

* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.358/2017 23rd August, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Gagan Mathur, Advocate (Mobile No.9811143077). versus JAI PRAKASH SUB- REGISTRAR IV-A & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Harshbir Singh Kohli, proxy Advocate (Mobile No.9810658944). 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 of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the plaintiff in the suit impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 21.12.2016 by which the trial court has dismissed the suit as time barred by dismissing an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.2. The subject suit was filed by the appellant/plaintiff under Section 77 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 challenging the Order RFA No.358/2017 Page 1 of 12 dated 3.1.2015 passed by the Registrar under the Registration Act,1908 refusing registration of the Gift Deed da...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 23 2018

National Institute of Public Finance and Policy vs.commissioner of Ser ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Aug-23-2018

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: August 23, 2018 + SERTA132018 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC FINANCE AND POLICY Through: Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sahu, Advocate ..... Appellant versus COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing ..... Respondent Counsel CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA ORDER % S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(Oral) 1. The following question of law arose for consideration of this court: Did the Tribunal fall into error in holding that only part of the amount claimed by the assessee was refundable and that the other part could not be repaid on account of expiry of limitation under Section 11(B) of the Central Excise Act or Section 27(c) of the Customs Act. 2. With consent of counsel for the parties, the appeal is finally heard today.3. The appellant is a registered society set up by Ministry of Finance, Planning Commission, several State Governments and SERTA132018 Page 1 of 3 distinguished ...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 23 2018

Mrs Sunaini Khale & Ors. Vs.state (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Aug-23-2018

* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:23. d August, 2018 + W.P.(CRL) 3378/2016 MRS SUNAINI KHALE & ORS ...... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.Bhal Singh Malik, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ...... RESPONDENTS Represented by: Mr.Ashish Aggarwal, ASC for the State with Mr.Piyush Singhal and Mr.Yash Kotak, Advocates Mr.Ashok Arora with Ms.Anantmala Potdar, Advocates for the complainant along with complainant in person + W.P.(CRL) 3380/2016 ARJUN GUPTA Represented by: Mr.Bhal Singh Malik, ....... Petitioner versus Advocate STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ....... RESPONDENTS Represented by: Mr.Ashish Aggarwal, ASC for the State with Mr.Piyush Singhal and Mr.Yash Kotak, Advocates Mr.Ashok Arora with Ms.Anantmala Potdar, Advocates for the complainant along with complainant in person CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA W.P.(CRL) 3378/2016 & 3380/3016 Page 1 of 7 MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. By these petitions the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.475/2016 under Sectio...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 23 2018

Rajesh Kumar & Anr. Vs.state & Anr.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Aug-23-2018

$~23 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 4885/2016 Decided on:23. d August, 2018 RAJESH KUMAR & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Nishant Tyagi, Advocate versus STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State with SI prempal, PS Mukherjee Ngr. Mr. Varun Jamwal, Adv. for complainant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The criminal case in which the petitioners are facing prosecution arises out of the report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 submitted on conclusion of investigation into first information report (FIR) no.3of police station Mukherjee Nagar registered on 19.11.2012, on the complaint of the second respondent who was working as a constable in the First Armed Battalion of Delhi Police at the relevant point of time. The charge- sheet was submitted in 2013 and charges concededly have been framed involving offences punishable under Sections 186, 353, 332, 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 agai...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 23 2018

Umesh Bhatia & Anr vs.today Homes & Infrastructure Pvt Ltd & Ors

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Aug-23-2018

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 23 2018

Satender Tomar & Ors. Vs.state of Nct & Anr.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Aug-23-2018

$~46 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 4238/2018 & Crl.M.A.30480/2018 Judgment delivered on:23.08.2018 SATENDER TOMAR & ORS STATE OF NCT & ANR versus ........ Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner(s) : For the Respondent(s): Mr.Rahul Singh Chauhan, Adv. Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with SI Ranveer Singh, P.S. Vasant Vihar CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2308.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.357/2014 under Sections 325/5IPC at Police Station Vasant Vihar. Subsequently, chargesheet has been filed under Section 308 IPC.2. The parties were partners in a partnership firm. On account of some financial disputes a quarrel took place which led to the incident consequent to which the subject FIR has been registered.3. Parties have settled their disputes not only with regard to the subject FIR but also with regard to the partnership concern. Comprom...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 23 2018

Commissioner of Customs vs.r.k. International

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Aug-23-2018

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: August 23, 2018 + CUS.A.C. 9/2009, C.M. Appl. No.25758/2018 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Through: Mr. Amit Bansal, Senior Standing Counsel ........ Petitioner versus R.K. INTERNATIONAL Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA ORDER2308.2018 % S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(Oral) 1. The question of law framed in this case is as follows: Whether the revenue is entitled to recover the customs duty under Section 125(2) of the Customs Act on the goods which are confiscated under Section 111(d) and allowed redemption under Section 125(1) of the said Act, even when no specific demand is made in the show cause notice?. 2. The brief facts of the case are that in an alleged violation of the law, imported computer components (i.e. memory cards, RAMs etc.) valued at `28,29,550/- were seized from the respondent on 01.06.2007. Pursuant thereto the statement of one Raj Kumar Ahuja CUS.A.C...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 23 2018

Harbans Lal Sarin vs.today Homes & Infrastructure P. Ltd. & Ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Aug-23-2018

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

‹ Prev
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Next ›
Last »

Delhi Court August 2018 Judgments

Open an 18-section brief on any judgment

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.