Delhi Court January 2019 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2019 Page 28 of about 755 results (0.017 seconds)Mukhtiyar Khan vs.devi Ram @ Bhagatji & Ors
Court: Delhi
$~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Order:22. 01.2019 + F.A.O. No.23/2019 & C.M. No.2750/2019 MUKHTIYAR KHAN ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhimanyu Redhu & Ms. Syed Maria Aijaz, Advocates. Versus DEVI RAM @ BHAGATJI & ORS ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL The impugned order dated 09.01.2019 issued by the court of 1. learned District & Sessions Judge, South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, in Civil Suit No.24/2019 by which he issued notice on the application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC to the respondents/defendants without granting ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of the appellant, is the subject-matter of challenge in this appeal.2. Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that the property in question was initially purchased by him on 18.10.1995 from the recorded owner Smt. Saroopi Devi and photostat copies of the General Power of Attorney, Agreement to Sell, affidavit, Will and FAO ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Sahu vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 22, 2019 CRL.M.C. 334/2019 & CRL.M.A. 1438.2019 RAMESH SAHU .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kameshwer Mishra, Advocate versus STATE & ANR. Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, learned .....Respondents Additional Public Prosecutor with ASI Ramdev Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.617/2016, under Section 448 of IPC registered at police station Bhalswa Dairy, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit of 21st December, 2018 of the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR now stands cleared between the parties. respondent No.2 and on the ground that Upon notice, Mr. Izhar Ahmad, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court is the complainant/first informant of FIR in question and he has been identified to be so, by ASI Ramdev, on the basis of identity proof produced by him. Respondent No.2, present bet...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Crompton Greaves Ltd vs.m/s Centre for Development of Telematics ( ...
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:31. 10.2018 Pronounced on:22. 01.2019 + FAO (OS) (COMM) 10/2017 & CM APPL. 997/2017 M/S CROMPTON GREAVES LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Parag Tripathi, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Prashanto Sr. Advocate with Sen, Mr.Udayan Verma, Mr.Srinivasan R., Mr.Kaustubh Singh & Mr.Shivanshu Singh, Advocates. versus M/S CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF TELEMATICS (C-DOT) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. J.C. Seth, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN MR.JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN % 1. The present appeal is directed against a judgment dated 16.12.2016 whereby the appellant's petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation, 1996 (hereinafter, the Act) was dismissed. The learned Single Judge declined to set aside an interim award dated 16.11.2016 passed by a Sole Arbitrator, under which the appellant Crompton Greaves Ltd. (hereinafter, CGL was directed to FAO (OS) (COMM) 10/2017 Page 1 of 18 pay 1.85 ...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Chander vs.durga Dutta & Ors
Court: Delhi
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.842/2016 22nd January, 2019 SURESH CHANDER ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ashok Gupta and Ms. Advocates Gupta, Laxmi (Mobile No.9810309723). DURGA DUTTA & ORS versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. R.K. Somkiya, Advocate for R-1 and 6 (Mobile No.9810124896). Mr. Rahul Gupta, Advocate for R-2 (Mobile No.9145487483). 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 09.09.2016 by which the trial court has rejected the suit plaint as barred by limitation and the trial court has also held that the appellant/plaintiff has no locus standi to file the suit. RFA No.842/2019 Page 1 of 6 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff is a handicapped person, but is appointed as a Head Constable with the ...
Tag this Judgment!Shashi Shekhar Thakur vs.state
Court: Delhi
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:10. h January, 2019 Decided on:22. d January, 2019 BAIL APPLN. 2789/2018 SHASHI SHEKHAR THAKUR Represented by: Ms. Geeta Luthra, Sr. Adv. with Ms. ........ Petitioner Shivani Luthra Lohiya, Mr. Sahil Modi, Mr. Santosh Yadav, Advs. STATE versus Represented by: Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP with SI Rupinder Kaur PS Connaught Place. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 By this petition the petitioner seeks bail in case FIR No.61/2013 under Sections 376(2)(f)/1IPC registered at PS Connaught Place.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner who was related to the prosecutrix was residing at Muzaffarpur. From the evidence of prosecutrix and other prosecution witnesses and the school she attended, it is evident that she never stayed with the petitioner but at Darbangha with her maternal uncle and aunt. The FIR in question has been registered belatedly after the petitioner opposed the marriage of the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Amul Gabrani vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 22, 2019 CRL.M.C. 323/2019, CRL.M.A. 1399-1400/2019 AMUL GABRANI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajay Digpaul, Mr. Rishi and Ms. Arti Bansal, Dewan, Advocates versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Jasnail Singh. Mr. Rajiv Sachar, Advocate with AR of Respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of F.I.R. No.490/2016, under Sections 406/4of IPC, registered at Police Station Janakpuri, Delhi is sought on the basis of Settlement Deed of 15th January, 2019 (Annexure P-5). Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State submits that Mr. Gulshan Kakkar, Authorized Representative of respondent No.2, is present in the Court and he has been identified to be so, by SI Jasnail Singh, on the basis of identity proof produced by him. CRL. M.C. 323/2019 Page 1 of 4 Authorized Representative of Respondent No...
Tag this Judgment!In the Matter of Omjee Texfab Private Limited (In Members’ Vol. Liqn ...
Court: Delhi
$~CP-30 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:22. 01.2019 CO.PET. 2/2019 IN THE MATTER OF OMJEE TEXFAB PRIVATE LIMITED (IN MEMBERS VOL. LIQN.) ...Petitioner Through Ms. Sangeeta Chandra, Advocate for the Official Liquidator CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition is filed under Section 497(6) of The Companies Act, 1956 (herein referred to as the Act) by the Official Liquidator (OL), seeking voluntary winding up of the Company OMJEE TEXFAB PRIVATE LIMITED (in members Voluntary Liquidation).2. The petitioner Company OMJEE TEXFAB PRIVATE LIMITED (hereinafter referred to as the Company (in Vol. Liqn.)) was incorporated under the provisions of the Act on 08.07.2009 having Corporate Identity Number U17290DL2009PTC192042 with the Registrar of Companies (ROC), NCT of Delhi & Haryana. The registered office of the Company (in Vol. Liqn.) is situated at 710, Church Mission Road, Fatehpuri, Delhi - 110006.3. In a Board Meeting held on ...
Tag this Judgment!Ankit Saxena vs.state Gnct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:22. 01.2019 BAIL APPLN. 1737/2018 ANKIT SAXENA versus STATE GNCT OF DELHI ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Mr. G.S. Sharma with Mr. R.A. Sharma and Mr. V.K. Sharma, Advocates. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent: CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State. SI Pankaj Kumar, PS Karawal Nagar. JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.209/2016 under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Karawal Nagar.2. Parties are related to each other. The petitioner is the son of the brother of the deceased. Both the parties live in the same house but on different floors. It is alleged in the FIR that a dispute took place between the parties which led to a verbal altercation. It is alleged that the sister of the petitioner, who lives on the ground floor, started abusing the complainant and her husband, who were on ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Anil Grover Ultrasound Clinic and Anr. Vs.district Appropriate Aut ...
Court: Delhi
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 13422/2018 & CM APPL.52290/2018, 54276/2018 DR. ANIL GROVER ULTRASOUND CLINIC AND ANR. Through: Mr Rajesh Banati and Mr Tarun Walia, Advocates. ........ Petitioners versus ..... Respondent Through: Dr Abhijeet Yadav, Nodal Officer, PC & PNDT (North). DISTRICT APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY (PC AND PNDT), NORTH-DISTRICT, ALIPUR, DELHI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER2201.2019 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioners have filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ be issued directing the respondents to renew the registration of petitioner no.1 under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (hereafter the Act).2. Dr Abhijeet Yadav, the Nodal Officer is present in Court and he submits that the petitioners application for renewal of registration has not been accepted as there is a case pending against petitioner no.2 (Dr Ani...
Tag this Judgment!Pawan Kumar Sharma vs.neelam Sharma & Anr.
Court: Delhi
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Order:22. 01.2019 F.A.O. No.435/2018 PAWAN KUMAR SHARMA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. M. Hasibuddin, Advocate. Versus NEELAM SHARMA & ANR. ....Respondents Through: Mr. Prateek K. Chadha, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL C.M. Nos.38072-38073/2018 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The applications stand disposed of. C.M. No.38071/2018 (for delay) For the reasons justified in the application, delay of 41 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The application is disposed of accordingly. F.A.O. No.435/2018 1. The impugned order dated 01.05.2018 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Head Quarters, Delhi, dismissing the application of the appellant, being M. No.5/17 under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (IS Act) seeking revocation of the probate of Will dated 10.07.2002 granted by judgment dated FAO No.435/2018 Page 1 of 4 09.01.2006 in Probate Case No.5/2005, is th...
Tag this Judgment!