Delhi Court January 2019 Judgments
Manoj Kumar Singh vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:3. d December, 2018 Decided on:8. h January, 2019 W.P.(C) 1034/2017 MANOJ KUMAR SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vinod K. Tewari and Mr. Manindra Dubey, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ....Respondents Through: Mr Jasmeet Singh, CGSC for UOI. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: JUDGMENT0801.2019 1. The... Petitioner, who was working as a Junior Engineer (JE) (Civil) in the Border Roads Organization (BRO) has approached the Court seeking directions to the... RESPONDENTS to antedate his promotion from the date when the first person who was junior to the... Petitioner in obtaining the eligibility/fitness for the post was promoted.2. The... Petitioner joined the BRO as a Lower Division Clerk (LDC) on 4th January, 1996. In 2001, he passed the departmental exam. In terms of the policy of the GREF, he was sent to the College of Military Engineering (CME), Pune for undergoing a diploma in C...
Tag this Judgment!Jitendra Kumar and Ors vs.uoi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2019
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved:19. h December, 2018 Pronounced on:08. h January, 2019 + W.P.(C) 7937/2017 & CM APPLN. 32765/2017 1. JITENDRA KUMAR AND ORS Through: Mr. T.D. Yadav, Advocate. ........ Petitioners Versus UOI AND ORS Through: Mr. R. M. Sinha, Advocate for R-2 & ........ RESPONDENTS R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT Vide the present petition, the petitioners seek direction thereby setting JUDGMENT aside the impugned order dated 31.08.2017 and direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioners in the service forthwith as MTS as per Office Order dated 27.07.2017 and further the petitioners may be allowed to work continue on adhoc basis as MTS till regularization and also seeks direction thereby directing the respondents to grant all the consequential benefits like W.P.(C) 7937/2017 Page 1 of 17 seniority and pay and allowances.2. The case of the petitioners is that the name of the petitioner No.1, was sponsored through Employment Exch...
Tag this Judgment!Himanshu Bansal vs.richa Poddar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2019
* IN THE HIGH CO URT O F DE L HI AT NEW DE LHI % Judgment reserved on:14. h December, 2018 Judgment delivered on:08. h January, 2019 + CRl. REV. PET. 76/2018 HIMANSHU BANSAL RICHA PODDAR versus ........ Petitioner ....Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Shakti Narayanan, Ms. Abhilasha and Ms. Shushila, Advs. For the... RESPONDENTS: Mr. D.K. Sharma and Mr. Sumit Sapra, Advs. for respondent CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J CRl. REV. PET. 76/2018 & CRL.M.A.1555/2018 (stay) 1.... Petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 16.10.2017 of the Mahila Court and order dated 18.01.2018 of the Appellate Court, whereby, the appeal of the petitioner, impugning order dated 16.10.2017 of the Mahila Court, was dismissed and the petitioner/father was directed to handover the interim custody of the minor daughter to the respondent/mother. CRL.REV. P.. 76/2018 Page 1 of 7 2. Respondent/mother had filed a petition under Section 12...
Tag this Judgment!Lennox James Ellis vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * % + W.P.(CRL) No.3432/ 2017 Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on:03. 10.2018 08 .01.2019 LENNOX JAMES ELLIS ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sumeet Verma, Advocate with Ms. Preeti Jakhar, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Mr. Anuj Handa and Ms. Radhalakshmi. R, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition to seek a writ of certiorari for: (i) quashing the Gazette of India Notified Order No.580, Part II, Section 3, Sub-Section (i) bearing G.S.R. 811 [E]. dated 23rd August 2016, published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary on 23rd August 2016; (ii) quashing the Extradition Request issued against him by the Department of Justice, Republic of Philippines on 4th August 2016 (iii) quashing the Order T-413/61/2016 dated 24th August 2016, issued by the Respondent W.P.(CRL) No.3432/ 20...
Tag this Judgment!Roderick John Andrew Mackenzie vs.himalayan Heli Services Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:10. h August, 2017 Decided on:8. h January, 2019 CS(OS) 205/2009 RODERICK JOHN ANDREW MACKENZIE..... Plaintiff Represented by: Mr.Kirti S. Javali and Ms.Nikita C. Jain, Advocates. Versus HIMALAYAN HELI SERVICES PVT. LTD. ..... Defendant Represented by: Mr. Vivek Malik and Mr.Mukul Thakur, Advocates. + Crl. M.A. No.5011/2009 in CS(OS) 210/2009 HIMACHAL HELICOPTER SKIING PTY LTD...... Plaintiff Represented by: Mr. Kirti S. Javali, Advocate. versus HIMALAYAN HELI SERVICES PVT. LTD...... Defendant Represented by: Mr.Vivek Malik and Mr.Mukul Thakur, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 Roderick John Andrew Mackenzie, the plaintiff in CS(OS) No.205/2009 filed the suit inter alia seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants their employees, servants, agents etc. from using or otherwise copying, selling, offering for sale, counterfeit/unlicensed versions of the plaintiffs copyright in his artistic work HIMLAYAN ...
Tag this Judgment!Pratap Singh & Ors. Vs.govt of Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2019
$~30 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 43/2017 * + PRATAP SINGH & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Vishal Maan, Advocate with Mr. Roshan Nandal and Mr. Aakash Sehrawat, Advocate. versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sumit Chander, Advocate with Mr. Jatin Choudhary, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Mr. Pawan Mathur, Standing Counsel for DDA. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA % Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. The prayer in the present petition reads as under: ORDER0801.2019 i. Issue an appropriate writ, order or directions declaring the entire acquisition proceedings in respect of the land of petitioners i.e. 7 bighas and 18 biswas out of land ad-measuring 9 Bighas and 17 Biswas comprised in khasra nos.649/346 (9-17), village Lado Sarai, New Delhi to have lapsed in view of Section 24 (2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013. ii. Pass any further o...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Kumar vs.renu & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2019
* + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 08, 2019 CRL.M.C. 6637/2018 & CRL.M.A. 50757/2018 VIJAY KUMAR Through: Ms. Shalini Sharma, Advocate .....Petitioner Versus RENU & ANR. Through: Ms. Namita Roy & Mr. Amit, .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Advocates ORDER (ORAL) Impugned order of 7th December, 2018 directs DNA testing to ascertain paternity of the minor child, whose right to claim maintenance is disputed by petitioner on the ground that he is not the natural father of the child in question. Trial court has relied upon Supreme Courts decision in Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik vs. Lata Nandlal Badwaik & Ors. (2014) 2 SCC576for allowing DNA testing for paternity of the child.2. The challenge to impugned order by petitioners counsel is on the ground that DNA testing is not to be routinely allowed.... Petitioners counsel submits that petitioner disputes that he was Crl.M.C. 6637/2018 Page 1 of 3 married with the first respondent. It is submit...
Tag this Judgment!Divya Kapoor vs.pankaj Chawla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2019
* I N T H E H I G H C O U R T O F D E L H I A T N E W D E L H I % Judgment reserved on:01. t November, 2018 Judgment delivered on:08. h January, 2019 + CRL.REV.P. 146/2017 ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent PANKAJ CHAWLA versus DIVYA KAPOOR + CRL.REV.P. 172/2017 DIVYA KAPOOR versus PANKAJ CHAWLA Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr.R.D.Singh, Adv. in CRL.REV.P. 146/2017 Mr. Osama Suhail, Ms. Samana Suhail and Ms. Bharti Tyagi, Advs in CRL.REV.P. 172/2017 For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. Osama Suhail, Ms. Samana Suhail and Ms. Bharti Tyagi, Advs. in CRL.REV.P. 146/2017 Mr.R.D.Singh, Adv. in CRL.REV.P. 172/2017 CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J CRL.REV.P. 146/2017 & CRL.REV.P. 172/2017 1. These cross-petitions impugn order dated 19.01.2017, whereby, the Family Court has disposed of the interim maintenance application filed by the Wife Divya Kapoor and directed the husband Pankaj Chawla t...
Tag this Judgment!Gaurav Gandotra & Anr vs.collector of Stamps & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2019
$~75 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 2808/2017 & CM No.12224/2017 GAURAV GANDOTRA & ANR ........ Petitioners Through: Ms Shraddha Bhargava, Advocate. versus COLLECTOR OF STAMPS & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms Jyoti Taneja, Advocate for GNCTD. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU ORDER0801.2019 % VIBHU BAKHRU, J The petitioners have filed the present petition, inter alia, 1. impugning an order dated 22.11.2016 passed by respondent no.1 (hereafter the Collector), whereby, he has adjudicated the deficient stamp duty payable in respect of the Sale Deed of the property described as SFS CAT-III, Flat No.9551 on ground + first floor (Duplex) in Sector-C, Pocket 09, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 (hereafter the said property) at `5,30,460/-.2.... Petitioner no.2 had entered into an Agreement to Sell (hereafter the Agreement) dated 31.03.2004 with respondent nos. 3 and 4 (hereafter for purchasing the said property at a the vendors) W.P. (C) 2808/2017 Page 1 of 10 co...
Tag this Judgment!Needle Industries (India) Private Limited & Anr. Vs.virmual Praveen Ku ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.790-91/2006 % NEEDLE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. 8th January, 2019 ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Peeyoosh Kalra, Advocate with Mr. V. Mohini, Advocate and Mr. Udayvir Rana, Advocate (M. No.9910657461). versus VIRMUAL PRAVEEN KUMAR ..... Respondent 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 plaintiffs in the suit impugning the Judgment of the trial court dated 19.08.2006 by which the trial court has dismissed the suit for injunction, damages etc. filed by the appellants/plaintiffs against the respondent/defendant. By the suit, the appellants/plaintiffs essentially claimed two rights. The first right was in the trademark 555 and this trademark 555 was used RFA No.790-91/2006 Page 1 of 10 with respect to haberdashery goods which include snap fasteners, needl...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- Next ›
- Last »