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.
Vinod Kumar & Anil Kumar vs.nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:26. h July 2018 Decided on:6. h August, 2018 + CRL.A.267/2003 VINOD KUMAR & ANIL KUMAR ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Sumeet Verma with Ms. NCT OF DELHI + versus Preeti Jakhar, Advocates. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP. CRL.A.268/2003 VINOD KUMAR & ANIL KUMAR ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Sumeet Verma with Ms. versus Preeti Jakhar, Advocates. NCT OF DELHI CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR Through: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP. ..... Respondent JUSTICE VINOD GOEL JUDGMENT Dr.S. Muralidhar, J.:1. These two appeals are directed against two judgments, both dated 25th March 2003, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari, Delhi in SC Nos.17/2000 and 18/2000 arising FIR Nos.780/1999 and 781/1999 respectively, both of which were registered at PS Shalimar Bagh, by which both the Appellants herein, Vinod Kumar (A-1) and his brother Anil Kumar (A-2), were convicted for the offences under Crl.As.267/2003 & 2...
M/S Crocs Inc Usa vs.m/s Liberty Shoes Ltd & Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:31. t July, 2018 Pronounced on:06. h August, 2018 + CS(COMM) 1415/2016 M/S CROCS INC USA ..... Plaintiff Through : Mr.S.K.Bansal, Mr.Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocates. versus M/S LIBERTY SHOES LTD & OTHERS ..... Defendants Through : Mr.Jayant Mehta, Mr.Kapil Wadhwa and Ms.Devyani Nath, Advocates for defendants/appellant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.O.A. No.84/2018 1. This chamber appeal is against an Order dated 12.07.2018 passed by the learned Joint Registrar wherein he has allowed the respondents application I.A.No.1629/2018 seeking permission to bring on record additional documents despite the plaintiff evidence being underway and two witnesses having been cross-examined. The additional documents were allowed to be brought on record by the Joint Registrar despite having filed after framing of issues and the commencement of the trial. It is alleged earlier too the plaintiff has been granted an opport...
M/S Icici Bank Limited vs.rahul & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO3122018 Judgment reserved on :31. t July, 2018 Date of decision :6th August, 2018 M/S ICICI BANK LIMITED ..... Appellant. Through: Mr. Puneet Bhalla, Advocate Versus RAHUL & ANR. Through: ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT ANU MALHOTRA, J.1. Vide the present appeal, the appellant assails the impugned order dated 02.06.2018 of the learned Trial Court in CS No.18whereby on a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery along with an application Under Order XL Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for appointment of a receiver to take over the possession of the vehicle, i.e., car make MAHINDRA SCORPIO/S10 bearing registration No.UP14M9502 the learned Trial Court directed the issuance of the summons for settlement of issues along with the notice of the said application to the defendant returnable for 5.10.2018.2. The prayer made by the appellant herein as plaintiff to the said suit seeking appointment of an ex...
Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited vs.sky Vision Digital Cable ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
1 $~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 14/2015 SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. K.K. Khetan, Advocate versus SKY VISION DIGITAL CABLE NETWORK ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Sudeep Chatterjee, Advocate with Ms. Drishti Chatterjee, Date of Decision:06. h August, 2018 Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) I.A. 10413/2018 Present application has been filed by the learned counsel for defendant seeking discharge from the present case. Along with the application, learned counsel for defendant-applicant has enclosed a formal notice of discharge addressed to the defendant. The delivery report annexed with the application shows that the same has been delivered to the defendant on 31st July, 2018. CS(COMM) 14/2015 Page 1 of 8 As the defendant has still not contacted its counsel, the present application is allowed and the learned counsel for defendant is discharged. CS(COMM) 14/2015 1.2. Since none is pr...
Marwar Hotels Limited vs.fortune Park Hotels Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
$-18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:6. h August, 2018 + O.M.P. (COMM) 242/2018 MARWAR HOTELS LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.S.S.Ray, Ms.Rakhi Ray, Mr.Vaibhav Gulia, Advs. versus FORTUNE PARK HOTELS LIMITED ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Kunal Kher, Ms.Subiya Akhar, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA NAVIN CHAWLA, J.(Oral) IA75002018 This is an application seeking condonation of 22 days delay in re-filing the petition. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned and the application stands allowed. O.M.P. (COMM) 242/2018 1. 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 27th December, 2017 passed by the Sole Arbitrator OMP(COMM.)242/2018 Page 1 allowing certain claims of the respondent.2. The disputes between the parties are in relation to the Agreement dated 3rd November, 2003, described...
Surender Kumar vs.east Delhi Municipal Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
#52 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:06. 08.2018 W.P.(C) 8059/2018 SURENDER KUMAR ........ Petitioner versus EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr. Prashant Sharma and Mr. Amit Kumar Verma, Advocates : Mr. G.D. Mishra, Advocate 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:-"In the facts and circumstances of the present case this Honble Court may pleased to: W.P.(C) 8059/2018 Page 1 of 3 a) Pass a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order(s)/direction(s) against the respondent, thereby directing or ordering the respondent to allow a period of 15 days to the petitioner to remove his machines, raw/furnished material out of the premises so sealed by the respondent i.e. premises bearing H.No.D-2/172-A, Plot No.5, Khasra No.324, Nehru Vih...
Vijay Gupta and Anr vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:6. h August, 2018 % + W.P.(C) 9196/2015 & CM No.20985/2015 (stay) VIJAY GUPTA AND ANR ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.B. Tripathy with Mr.Randhir Pandey, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate for UOI. Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for LAC/L&B. Ms.Mrinalini Sen Gupta and Mr.Tanmay Gupta, Advocates for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S. SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioners seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings pertaining to land of the petitioners comprised in khasra No.84min, measuring 2 Bighas, situated in the revenue estate of Village Satbari, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi, are deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acqu...
Tata Sons Ltd & Anr vs.krishna Kumar & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:30. h July, 2018 Pronounced on:6. h August, 2018 + CS(COMM) 225/2018 TATA SONS LTD & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through : Mr.Pravin Anand, Ms.Achuthan Sreekumar & Mr.Akshay Agarwal, Advocates. versus KRISHNA KUMAR & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA Through None being ex parte. ..... Defendants YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. The plaintiff has filed this suit for permanent injunction, infringement of registered trademark, passing off, damages, rendition of accounts, delivery up; and transfer of domain name against the defendants.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of this suit, as alleged, are:-"a) the Plaintiff No.l was established in the year 1917 as a body corporate, is the promoter and principal investment holding company of the House of TATA, which is India's oldest, largest and best-known business conglomerate, with a turnover of about US$103billion (around Rs.624,757 billion) in 20l3-14, with 67% of this coming from busin...
Ratna Infrastructure Projects Pvt. Ltd vs.meja Urja Nigam Private Limi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
$~J- * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Pronounced on:06. 08.2018 + ARB.P. 333/2017 RATNA INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT. LTD......... Petitioner Through: Ms. Kiran Suri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Purvesh & Mr. Abhay N Dass Advocates MEJA URJA NIGAM PRIVATE LIMITED (MUNPL)....Respondent Through: Mr. Monish Panda with Ms. Mrinal Bharat Ram, Advocates versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.This petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and 1. Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Arbitration Act) seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was awarded the Work of Site Leveling and Infrastructure Works Package for Meja Thermal Power projects vide Letter of Award of work contract on 18.05.2010. The parties executed a contract on 21.09.2010. The respondent is a joint venture company of NTPC and Uttar Pradesh Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. ...
M/S Icici Bank Limited vs.v Square Development Company Pvt. Ltd.&anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO3222018 Judgment reserved on :31. t July, 2018 Date of decision :6. h August, 2018 M/S ICICI BANK LIMITED ..... Appellant. Through: Mr. Puneet Bhalla, Advocate Versus V SQUARE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PVT. LTD.&ANR. ..... RESPONDENTS Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT ANU MALHOTRA, J.1. Vide the present appeal, the appellant assails the impugned order dated 6.6.2018 of the learned Trial Court in CS No.18whereby on a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery along with an application Under Order XL Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for appointment of a receiver to take over the possession of the vehicle, i.e., car make REXTON RX7/AT bearing registration No.HR- 26BY-7763, the learned Trial Court directed the issuance of the summons for settlement of issues along with the notice of the said application to the defendant returnable for 8.10.2018. FAO No.322/2018 Page 1 of 8 2. The prayer made by the appellant herein ...