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.
Shyam Sunder vs.state of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2019
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:1. t October, 2019 Date of Decision:17. h October, 2019 BAIL APPN.1900/2019 SHYAM SUNDER ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Ahuja, versus Adv. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Chadha, APP with Insp. Ravinder Pandit, PS C.R. Park, Delhi Mr. Manmeet Singh Arora and Ms. Hemakshi Rajawat, Advs. for complainant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR CHANDER SHEKHAR, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.0071/2019 under Sections 406/420/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), registered at PS C.R. Park, Delhi.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the Investigating Officer (IO) after dismissal of his anticipatory bail application on 25.07.2019 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Saket Courts (South East), New Del...
Rachin Mittal vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2019
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:17. 10.2019 + W.P.(C) 4356/2019& CM. No.19343/2019 RACHIN MITTAL Through: versus Mr. Sachin Mittal, Adv. ........ Petitioner UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI JUDGMENT G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present petition is directed against order dated 02.04.2019 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal). Some necessary facts which are required to be noticed for disposal of this writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed as an Inspector/Preventive Officer (Customs) pursuant to SSC CGLE 2008. He joined service on 27.01.2011 and has continued to work till date.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that persons junior to him have been promoted while the petitioner has been overlooked on the ground that the petitioner has not completed the requisite length of W.P.(C) 4356/2019 pa...
Naresh Kumar vs.pritam Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2019
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:17. 10.2019 RC.REV. 600/2015 & CM APPL. 35392/2017 NARESH KUMAR PRITAM SHARMA versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Ms. Pushti Gupta, Advocate with petitioner in person. For the Respondent: Mr. C.P. Tyagi and Mr. Manish Bishnoi, Advocates with respondent in person. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioners impugn order dated 20.05.2015, whereby eviction petition filed by the respondent has been allowed after trial.2. Subject eviction petition was filed by the respondent seeking eviction of the petitioner on the ground of bonafide necessity under Section 14(1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, from shop No.3, Tanky Road, Pt. Yadram Market, Opposite Dispensary, Bhajanpura, Delhi, more particularly as shown in red colour in the site RC.REV. 600/2015 Page 1 of 3 plan annexed with the eviction...
Bharat Rattan Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Dalit Utthan Evom Shiksha Samiti ( ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2019
$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:17. 10.2019 + W.P.(C) 11028/2019 & CM APPL. 45521/2019 BHARAT RATTAN DR. BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR DALIT UTTHAN EVOM SHIKSHA SAMITI (REGD.) ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. Puneet Mittal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sumit Choudhary, Ms.Vasudha Bajaj, Advocates. versus EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Standing Counsel for EDMC with Mr.Sanjeev Garg, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI JUDGMENT G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM APPL. 45521/2019 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 11028/2019 1. Learned counsel for the respondent has entered appearance. W.P.(C) No.11028/2019 page 1 of 7 2. With the consent of the parties, the petition is set-down for final hearing and disposal today. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the petition are that the Education Department of East ...
M/S Krishna Ferro Products Ltd. & Ors. Vs.state (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + W.P.(CRL) 2006/2019 & Crl. M.A. 318Date of decision:17. 10.2019 M/S KRISHNA FERRO PRODUCTS LTD. & ORS ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Aprit Bhatacharyya, Ms. Roma Versus Bedi, Advocates. ..... Respondent STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR Through Mr. Amanpreet Singh for Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel for Respondent No.1/State. Insp. Suresh Chand from PS EOW Ms. Priyanka Tomar, Adv. Along with AR Mr. Subhankar Majumdar for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI BRIJESH SETHI, J (ORAL) JUDGMENT W.P.(CRL) 2006/2019 1. Original AR of Respondent No.2 as well as current authorized AR of the respondent No.2 namely Mr. Subhankar Majumdar are present and submit that the matter has been settled between the parties and therefore, quashing of FIR No.143/2017, under Sections 406/420/120B IPC, registered at police station EOW, New Delhi is sought.2. 3. Notice. Learned ASC accepts notice. It is submitted by both the parties that the dispute between t...
Musaraf Ahmad vs.pritam Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2019
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:17. 10.2019 RC.REV. 544/2015 MUSARAF AHMAD PRITAM SHARMA versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Ms. Pushti Gupta, Advocate with petitioner in person. For the Respondent: Mr. C.P. Tyagi and Mr. Manish Bishnoi, Advocates with respondent in person. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioners impugn order dated 20.05.2015, whereby eviction petition filed by the respondent has been allowed after trial.2. Subject eviction petition was filed by the respondent seeking eviction of the petitioner on the ground of bonafide necessity under Section 14(1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, from shop No.4, Tanky Road, Pt. Yadram Market, Opposite Dispensary, Bhajanpura, Delhi, more particularly as shown in red colour in the site RC.REV. 544/2015 Page 1 of 3 plan annexed with the eviction petition.3. Learned ...
Jeebak Dasgupta vs.m/s Fullmoon Productions & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2019
$~A-3 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:17. 10.2019 ARB.P. 369/2019, I.A. No.9558/2019 (Objections), 14403/2019 (Delay 34 days in filing rejoinder) JEEBAK DASGUPTA ........ Petitioner Through: Ms. Tania Sharma, Ms. Shankari Mishra, Mr. Tarun, Advocates versus M/S FULLMOON PRODUCTIONS & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Krishnu Barua, Advocate for respondent No.1, 2, 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH JYOTI SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The present dispute has arisen between the parties in relation to Partnership Agreement dated 07.02.2013.2. Reply has been filed by respondent No.2 and 3 where initially an objection was taken that there is no Arbitration Agreement in existence between the parties as the said partnership agreement has not been executed between the petitioner and respondent No.2 and 3.3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents on instructions from the respondents however fairly submits today that respondents have no objection if...
Tarun Nagpal vs.m/s Auto Incline & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2019
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:17. 10.2019 C.R.P. 86/2018 TARUN NAGPAL versus M/S AUTO INCLINE & ANR ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: For the Respondent: Mr. Sumit Jidani, Advocate. Mr. Maninder Jeet Singh, Advocate. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner impugns order dated 16.01.2018, whereby, the application of the petitioner under Order 18 seeking recall of PW1 has been dismissed.2.... Petitioner had filed the subject suit for recovery of money. PW1 petitioner was under cross-examination and the matter was adjourned to 22.12.2016. On 22.12.2016, petitioner was present in Court at 10 am, when the matter was called and informed the Court that his counsel had gone to the High Court and could not reach the Court before 11 am. The Court granted a pass over to the petitioner C.R.P. 86/2018 Page 1 of 3 till 10:30 am with a d...
Deepak Nanda @ Vicky Nanda vs.the State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2019
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:17. 10.2019 BAIL APPLN. 2623/2019 & Crl. M. A. 38433/2019 Deepak Nanda @ Vicky Nanda ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Alok, Ms. Aanchal Budhiraja and Deepanshu Gupta, Advocates versus THE STATE OF DELHI Through: Mr G.M.Farooqui, ..... Respondent APP for State alongwith Insp. Ravi Kant, PS Mahendra Park. Mr. Vivek Aggarwal, Adv. for complainant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI JUDGMENT BRIJESH SETHI, J (ORAL1 Vide this order, I shall dispose of an anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner Deepak Nanda @ Vicky Nanda under section 438 Cr.P.C. r/w. section 482 CrPC in FIR No.03u/s. 406/420/120-B IPC.2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail on the ground that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely Bail Appl. No.2623/2019 Page no.1 implicated in the present FIR. The petitioner is doing the business of fruits at New Subzi Mandi, Azadpur, Delhi. One Mohan Lal, who was ...
Surinder Kumar Sood vs.suresh Kumar Mathur
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-2019
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + RC.REV. 464/2017 & CM APPL.37312/2017 Judgment delivered on:17. 10.2019 SURINDER KUMAR SOOD SURESH KUMAR MATHUR versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr. Sachin Datta, Senior Advocate with Ms. Prity Sharma, Ms. Rijuta Mohanty and Mr. B. L. Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondent: Ms. Prachee Satija, Advocate. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner impugns order dated 29.05.2017 whereby the leave to defend application filed by the respondent has been allowed.2. Subject petition was filed by the petitioner under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act seeking eviction of the respondent from one shop on the ground floor bearing Shop No.1 in property bearing No.H-12, Main Market, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi, more particularly as shown in red colour in the site plan annexed to the eviction petition. RC.REV.464/2017 Page 1 o...
- ‹ Prev
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- Next ›
- Last »