Delhi Court January 2019 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2019 Page 54 of about 755 results (0.021 seconds)Kapil Mann & Anr. Vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~24-42. 20190/2018 Date of Decision:10. 01.2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * + % W.P.(C) 6941/2015 & CM APPL. 12722-12723/2015, CM APPL. + W.P.(C) 6948/2015 & CM APPL. 12735-12736/2015 + W.P.(C) 6970/2015 & CM APPL. 12768/2015, CM APPL. MONIKA SHARMA & ORS GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS CHHATARPAL SINGH & ORS GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS ..... Respondent ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner versus versus 831/2019 SAREEN DABAS & ORS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS + W.P.(C) 7602/2015 & CM APPL. 38562/2017, CM APPL. ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner versus versus 37169/2018 HEMRAJ GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS + W.P.(C) 7997/2015 & CM APPL. 16316/2015 KAPIL MANN AND ANR GOVT. OF NCT DELHI AND ORS. versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent W.P.(C.) No.6941/2015 & connected matters Page 1 of 15 versus LALIT KISHORE CHANDA & ORS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS versus versus PREETI DEVI GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS SATYA PRAKASH SEHRAWAT...
Tag this Judgment!Deepika vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~24-42. 20190/2018 Date of Decision:10. 01.2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * + % W.P.(C) 6941/2015 & CM APPL. 12722-12723/2015, CM APPL. + W.P.(C) 6948/2015 & CM APPL. 12735-12736/2015 + W.P.(C) 6970/2015 & CM APPL. 12768/2015, CM APPL. MONIKA SHARMA & ORS GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS CHHATARPAL SINGH & ORS GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS ..... Respondent ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner versus versus 831/2019 SAREEN DABAS & ORS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS + W.P.(C) 7602/2015 & CM APPL. 38562/2017, CM APPL. ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner versus versus 37169/2018 HEMRAJ GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS + W.P.(C) 7997/2015 & CM APPL. 16316/2015 KAPIL MANN AND ANR GOVT. OF NCT DELHI AND ORS. versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent W.P.(C.) No.6941/2015 & connected matters Page 1 of 15 versus LALIT KISHORE CHANDA & ORS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS versus versus PREETI DEVI GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS SATYA PRAKASH SEHRAWAT...
Tag this Judgment!M/S In-Fer India vs.m/s b.a.g Films and Media Ltd
Court: Delhi
$~CP-9 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CO.PET. 57/2012 M/S IN-FER INDIA Date of decision 10.01.2019 ........ Petitioner Through Mr.V.K.Shukla and Mr.B.R.Pandey, Advs. versus M/S B.A.G FILMS AND MEDIA LTD..... Respondent Through Mr.Abhishek Malhotra, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) This petition is filed under section 433(e) read with section 434 and 1. 439 of the Companies Act, 1956. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner firm was awarded work order by the respondent on 22.10.2007 for carrying out the additional work for studio for B.A.G. Films and Media Limited at Noida for an amount of Rs.77,28,027/-. The petitioner states that they have completed the entire work to the satisfaction of the respondent and invoices for Rs.80,46,429.48/- were raised. The Architect of the respondent company Innovation Architect and Interior Designers approved the bill of Rs.79,87,515/- and issued an appropriate certificate. It is stated that desp...
Tag this Judgment!M/S n.r.n Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs.shri Sanjeev Bhardwaj
Court: Delhi
$~OS-18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:10. 01.2019 CS(OS) 615/2017 M/S N.R.N AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD. Through Mr.Abhishek Paruthi, Adv. ..... Plaintiff versus SHRI SANJEEV BHARDWAJ Through None. ..... Defendant % + CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,15,60,000/- (Rupees Two Crores Fifteen Lakhs Sixty Thousand) from the defendant with pendent lite and future interest @ 18% per annum. Other connected reliefs are also sought.2. Notice of the suit was issued to the defendant. Learned Counsel for the defendant entered appearance but no written statement was filed despite being given sufficient amount of time. Hence, the defendant has been proceeded ex-parte by virtue of the order of this court dated 26.07.2018.3. Essentially, the case of the plaintiff is that the defendant approached the plaintiff for sale of a rice mill at village Daun Kala, District Patiala, Punjab (herein referred to as the s...
Tag this Judgment!Sunil Gupta vs.roots Corporation Limited
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:25. 09.2018 Judgment pronounced on:10. 01.2019 ARB.P. 273/2018 + SUNIL GUPTA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Bansal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Lokesh Bhola, Ms. Harshita Agarwal, Ms. Fiza Saluja, Ms. Aprajita Gupta and Ms. Kamna Singh, Advs. ROOTS CORPORATION LIMITED versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Akhil Sibal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Nikhil Chawla, Mr. Saswat Pattnaik and Mr. Aditya Panda, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.Prefatory Facts:1. The petitioner is in the second round of litigation. In the first round a similar petition was filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short 1996 Act) which was disposed of via order dated 04.10.2016. This petition was numbered as ARB. P. No.444/2012. The petitioner was unable to get any relief in the first round; principally, on account of the objection raised by the respondent that the Agreement to Lease dated 01.03.2007 ...
Tag this Judgment!Akhil Sibal Through His Current General Power of Attorney Holder Aradh ...
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:10. h January, 2019 7 & 21 + W.P.(C) 3623/2018 AKHIL SIBAL THROUGH HIS CURRENT GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER ARADHNA BEHL ........ Petitioner Through: Ms Palak Mishra and Ms Suhani Mathur, Advocates. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr Mohit Chaudhary and Mr Imran Ali, Advocates for R-1/GNCTD. Mr Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for the LAC/L&B. Mr Ajay Verma, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel with Mr Sumit Mishra, Advocates for DDA. W.P.(C) 3466/2018 + AKHIL SIBAL THROUGH AMIT SHARMA & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Ms Palak Mishra and Ms Suhani Mathur, Advocates. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for the LAC/L&B. Mr Ajay Verma, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel with Mr Sumit Mishra, Advocates for DDA...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Nirman Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs.delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. & ...
Court: Delhi
$~17 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 3/2019 Date of Decision :10. h January, 2019 VIJAY NIRMAN COMPANY PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Ganesh Chandru, Mr.Siddharth Agarwal, Mr.Prashant Kumar and Mr.Avinash Das, Advs. versus DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD. & ANR. Through: Mr.Virender Sood and ........ RESPONDENTS Mr.Anshuman Sood, Advs. for R-1. Mr.Sidhartha Barua and Ms.Adity Gupta, Advs. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA NAVIN CHAWLA, J.(Oral) I.A.No.293/2019 (EXEMPTION) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. OMP(I)(Comm.) 3/2019 1. This petition has been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) inter alia seeking the following prayer: OMP (I) (Comm.) No.3/2019 Page 1 the Grant an injunction restraining Respondent No.1 from encashing two performance bank guarantees, viz., BG No.140150IBGP00039 dated 9 May 2014 for Rs.5,97,36,279 (extended from time to tim...
Tag this Judgment!Lalit Kishore Chanda & Ors. Vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~24-42. 20190/2018 Date of Decision:10. 01.2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * + % W.P.(C) 6941/2015 & CM APPL. 12722-12723/2015, CM APPL. + W.P.(C) 6948/2015 & CM APPL. 12735-12736/2015 + W.P.(C) 6970/2015 & CM APPL. 12768/2015, CM APPL. MONIKA SHARMA & ORS GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS CHHATARPAL SINGH & ORS GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS ..... Respondent ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner versus versus 831/2019 SAREEN DABAS & ORS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS + W.P.(C) 7602/2015 & CM APPL. 38562/2017, CM APPL. ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner versus versus 37169/2018 HEMRAJ GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS + W.P.(C) 7997/2015 & CM APPL. 16316/2015 KAPIL MANN AND ANR GOVT. OF NCT DELHI AND ORS. versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent W.P.(C.) No.6941/2015 & connected matters Page 1 of 15 versus LALIT KISHORE CHANDA & ORS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS versus versus PREETI DEVI GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS SATYA PRAKASH SEHRAWAT...
Tag this Judgment!Manjeet Singh & Ors. Vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~24-42. 20190/2018 Date of Decision:10. 01.2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * + % W.P.(C) 6941/2015 & CM APPL. 12722-12723/2015, CM APPL. + W.P.(C) 6948/2015 & CM APPL. 12735-12736/2015 + W.P.(C) 6970/2015 & CM APPL. 12768/2015, CM APPL. MONIKA SHARMA & ORS GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS CHHATARPAL SINGH & ORS GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS ..... Respondent ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner versus versus 831/2019 SAREEN DABAS & ORS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS + W.P.(C) 7602/2015 & CM APPL. 38562/2017, CM APPL. ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner versus versus 37169/2018 HEMRAJ GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS + W.P.(C) 7997/2015 & CM APPL. 16316/2015 KAPIL MANN AND ANR GOVT. OF NCT DELHI AND ORS. versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent W.P.(C.) No.6941/2015 & connected matters Page 1 of 15 versus LALIT KISHORE CHANDA & ORS GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS versus versus PREETI DEVI GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS SATYA PRAKASH SEHRAWAT...
Tag this Judgment!Rakesh Kumar vs.kiran Verma
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 10, 2019 * + CRL.M.C. 1041/2017 RAKESH KUMAR Through: Mr. K.B.B. Singh, Advocate .....Petitioner Versus KIRAN VERMA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate with respondent in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) 1. In proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as DV Act), the court below has directed petitioner to pay interim maintenance of 25,000/- per month to respondent. The challenge to impugned judgment of 22nd November, 2016 and 2. order of 6th August, 2016 by petitioners counsel is on the ground that as per the income tax return, the income of 28,200/- from other sources, is the annual is submitted that the court below has erred in assessing petitioners income at 50,000/- and it ought to be assessed at 25,000/-. Upon hearing, and on perusal of impugned order, I find that the 3. aforesaid plea taken by petitioner is not substanti...
Tag this Judgment!