Delhi Court October 2019 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.
Uoi vs.rose Zinc Ltd & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2019
$~60 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:21. t October, 2019 + W.P.(C) 1108/20 1. UOI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Sr.Standing Counsel-DRI with Mr. Akshay Saxena, Adv. versus ROSE ZINC LTD & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Praveena Gautam, Ms. Sweety Pandey and Mr. Pawan Shukla, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT D.N. PATEL, Chief Justice (Oral) The present writ petition has been preferred by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, challenging an Admission Order dated 11th January, 2008 passed by the Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission under Section 127C of the Customs Act, 1962 as well as an order of transfer of the matter by the Chairman, Principal Bench to the Additional Bench, Mumbai vide order dated 18th October, 2007.2. We have heard the counsel for both sides and it appears from the facts of the case that respondent No.1 has imported Zinc Ash, Zinc Skimming and W.P.(C...
Rohit Gupta vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2019
% + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:21. 10.2018 CRL.A. 616/2016 &Crl. M. (Bail) No.689/2018 ROHIT GUPTA versus STATE Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr. H. S. Sharma, Advocate. : Mr. Amit Gupta, APP with : SI Ashish Sharma, P.S. Burari. CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The appellant (hereafter also referred to as the accused) has challenged the judgment dated 03.05.2016 passed by the ASJ-03 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi whereby he has been convicted of the offences punishable under Section 498-A and Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). He also impugns an order dated 11.05.2016, whereby he has been sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of 10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC and to serve a period of six years of rigorous imprisonment and pay a fine of...
Naved & Anr. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2019
$~72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. 10.2019 + CRL.M.C. 5388/2019 NAVED & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through Mr.Gaurav Saini, Adv. with petitioners in person. versus STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr.K.K. Ghai, APP for State. ASI Kailash Chander PS Jamia Nagar. Mr.Anees Ahmad, Adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT (ORAL) Crl.M.A. 38725/2019 (Exemption) 1.2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application is, accordingly, disposed of. CRL.M.C. 5388/2019 3. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby quashing of the FIR No.123/2019 dated 06.07.2019 registered at Police Station Jamia Nagar for the offences punishable under section 356/3CRL.M.C.5388/2019 Page 1 of 4 IPC and consequent proceedings arising therefrom.4. The present petition has been filed on the ground that the petitioners and respondent no.2/complainant have amicably settled all their disputes and respond...
Neeru Jain vs.jasmine Buildmart Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2019
s* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:26. 09.2019 Pronounced on:21. 10.2019 M.K. JAIN M.K. JAIN NEERU JAIN % + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 280/2019 + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 281/2019 + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 282/2019 + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 283/2019 + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 284/2019 + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 285/2019 + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 286/2019 M.K. JAIN (HUF) THROUGH MR. M.K. JAIN, KARTA M.K. JAIN RISHABH JAIN Versus M.K.JAIN ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent JASMINE BUILDMART PVT. LTD. Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Senior Advocate, Mr. Akhil sibal, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Kuber Dewan, Ms. Manjira, Ms. Deboshree, Mr. Vipul Wadhwa, Ms. Suvarna Kashyap, Advocates O.M.P. (I) (COMM.) 280-286/2019 Page 1 of 44 Counsel for the respondent: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Ms. Bina Gupta, Ms. Sheena Taqui, Mr. Kshitij Vaibhav, Ms. Suvarna Dubey, Advocates CORAM: HON...
Dezhou Shengli Pipeline Crossing Engineering vs.indian Oil Corporation ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2019
$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:21. 10.2019 + W.P.(C) 11230/2019 DEZHOU SHENGLI PIPELINE CROSSING ENGINEERING ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Raman Gandhi, Mr.Aditya Mishra & Ms. Akansha Jain, Advs. versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Rahul Narayan, Ms. Mala Narayan, Mr. Shashwat Goel & Mr. Digvijay, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI JUDGMENT G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM APPL. No.46210/2019 (exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) No.11230/2019 page 1 of 3 W.P.(C) 11230/2019 & CM APPL. No.46209/2019 (stay) 1. The petitioner has challenged an E-tender issued on 24.09.2019 from Rajkot in respect of sites in the State of Maharashtra, for work, which the petitioner contends, already stands awarded to the petitioner through a contract duly executed between the parties ...
Upwan Chhabra vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2019
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. 10.2019 + BAIL APPLN. 1393/2019 UPWAN CHHABRA ........ Petitioner STATE Mr. Abhimanyu Kampani, Ms. Swapnil Krishna and Ms. Nipun, Advocates. Through Mr. Rajiv Mohan, Advocate with versus Through Mr. G.M. Farooqui, APP for the State with SI Anil Rathod PS Greater Kailash. Mr. Sangam Kumar, Mr. Sanjay Diwakar and Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocates. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI JUDGMENT BRIJESH SETHI, J (Oral) BAIL APPLN. 1393/2019 & CRL.M.A. 35670/2019 1. This is an anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner in FIR No.105/2019, under Section 376/323/506/5IPC, PS Greater Kailash.2. The petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail on the ground that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal Bail Appl No.1393/2019 Page no.1 antecedent and the allegations levelled by the victim/complainant against him are false. It is further submitted that petitioner is a ...
Oxbridge Associates Limited vs.mr Atul Kumra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 3148/2015 Reserved on:5. h September, 2019 Pronounced on:21. t October, 2019 OXBRIDGE ASSOCIATES LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr.Jayant Mehta, Mr.Sumeet Lall, Mr.Nikhil Lal & Mr.Sajal Jain, Advocates. versus MR ATUL KUMRA ..... Defendant Through: Mr.Amit Singh, Mr.Rajan Singh & Mr.Atul Kumra in Person. % CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN JUDGMENT IA13852017 in CS(OS) 3148/2015 (under Order XIII-A r/w Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC) 1. The plaintiff has filed the abovementioned suit for a decree against the defendant in the sum of 1,55,46,586.62 alongwith pendente lite and future interest. By the present application, the plaintiff seeks summary judgment under Order XIII-A Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the CPC) CS(OS) 3148/2015 Page 1 of 29 in the sum claimed or alternatively, a decree upon admission for a lesser amount, allegedly admitted by the defendant.2. During the course of this s...
Hari Shankar & Ors. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2019
$~64 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. 10.2019. + CRL.M.C. 5372/2019 HARI SHANKAR & ORS. Through Ms. Saloni Kaushik, Adv. ........ Petitioners STATE & ANR. versus Through Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, APP for State. ........ RESPONDENTS Insp. Vinay Kumar, ATO/Khajuri Khas CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT (ORAL) CRL.M.A. 38677/2019 1.2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. CRL.M.C. 5372/2019 3. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby quashing FIR No.141/2006 dated 01.04.2006, registered at PS Khajuri Khas and all other proceedings emanating therefrom.4. Notice issued. CRL.M.C. 5372/2019 Page 1 of 3 5. Notice is accepted by learned APP for the State.6. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the present petition is taken up for final disposal.7. The present petition is filed on the ground that the parties have settled their disputes and the respondent no.2 has no objection if the p...
M/S Prem Jawellers Through Its Proprietor Mr. Sudhir Kumar Bhalla vs.d ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2019
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. tOctober, 2019 + W.P.(C) 8794/2019 M/S PREM JAWELLERS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR MR. SUDHIR KUMAR BHALLA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Shubhankar Jha and Mr. Aakarsh Srivastava, Advs. Versus DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE AND ANR. Through: Mr. ........ RESPONDENTS Satish Aggarwala, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Akshay Saxena, Adv. for respondent No.1 Mr. Rohit Gupta, Adv. respondent No.2 for CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR ORDER2110.2019 % D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL) 1. This writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers: (i) Issue writ of certiorari thereby setting aside the impugned communication dated 29.10.2015 and 17.12.2015 issued by respondent No.1 to respondent No.2; and (ii) Issue writ of mandamus order direction thereby directing the respondent No.1 to issue no objection certificate to the respondent No.2 for release of security lying with the responde...
Munjal Showa Ltd. & Anr vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2019
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. tOctober, 2019 + W.P.(C) 12292/2018 MUNJAL SHOWA LTD. & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Arshad Hidaytullah, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Jitendra Singh and Mr. P.K. Ram, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Vinod Diwakar, CGSC with Mr. Abhishek Bhati and Mr. Vishal Singh, Advs. for respondent No.1 Ms. Sonu Bhatnagar, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Vaibhav Joshi, Ms. Anushree Narain and Ms. Venus Mehrotra, Advs. for respondent nos. 2 and 3 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR ORDER2110.2019 % D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL) 1. This writ petition has been preferred against the order in original passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs dated 3rd October, 2018 (Annexure P-1 to the memo of this writ petition).2. Having heard counsel for the petitioners and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason to entertain this writ petition...
- ‹ Prev
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- Next ›
- Last »