Delhi Court February 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.
Sh Rajeev Tandon & Anr vs.smt Rashmi Tandon
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2019
$~J- * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:23. 01.2019 Judgment Pronounced on:28. 02.2019 CS(OS) 501/2016 SH RAJEEV TANDON & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr.Prabhjit Jauhar, Ms.Rosemary and Raju, Ms.Aishwarya Ms.Upasana Goel, Advs. versus SMT RASHMI TANDON ..... Defendant Through Mr.Gaurav Mitra, Mr.Vaibhav Mishra and Ms.Rashmita Roy Choudhury, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.IA No.14323/2016 1. This application is filed by the plaintiffs under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC seeking a decree based on admissions. The plaintiffs have filed the suit for permanent and mandatory injunction. The plaintiffs have prayed for a decree of mandatory injunction in favour of the plaintiffs for removing the defendant, her agents, etc. from one room on the ground floor of the suit property D-404, Defence Colony, New Delhi as shown in the site plan.2. The case of the plaintiffs is that plaintiff No.1 is the brother of defendant. Plaintiff No.2 is the wife o...
Param Preet Singh vs.devender Kumar Relan & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2019
$~5 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :08. h February, 2019 Judgment pronounced on :28. h February, 2019 RFA(OS) 78/2018, CM APPL471072018 PARAM PREET SINGH ..... Appellant Through Mr. J.C. Mahindro with Mr. versus Shubham Aggarwal, Advocates. CORAM: DEVENDER KUMAR RELAN & ORS Through Mr. Mukul Gupta & Mr. Atul Y. Chitale, Sr. Advocates with Ms. Tanvi Kakar & Mr. Himanshu Bajaj, Advocates for R-1 to R-10. ..... Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 05.09.2018 by which an application filed by the appellant under Section 14 of the Limitation Act has been dismissed and consequently, the suit filed by the appellant has been dismissed being barred by limitation.2. The facts which have given rise to filing of the present appeal are that the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) had filed a suit for specific performance of an agreem...
Ircon International Ltd vs.union of India and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:-"28.02.2019 + W.P.(C) 9691/2016 & C.M.No.38748/2016 + W.P.(C) 11227/2016 & C.M.No.43949/2016 + W.P.(C) 69/2017 & C.M.No.431/2017 + W.P.(C)1786/2017 & C.M.No.7903/2017 + W.P.(C) 4481/2017 & C.M.No.19574/2017 + W.P.(C) 4530/2017 & C.M.No.19787/2017 + W.P.(C) 4580/2017 & C.M.No.19980/2017 + W.P.(C) 4582/2017 & C.M.No.20011/2017 + W.P.(C) 4650/2017 & C.M.No.20222/2017 + W.P.(C) 5058/2017 & C.M.No.21722/2017 + W.P.(C) 5468/2017 & C.M.No.22982/2017 IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD ........ Petitioner Through Mr.A.P.Nagrath with Mr.Anish Kumar, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondent Through Mr.Vikram Jetly, CGSC for R-1 in W.P.(C) 9691/2016 . Ms.Mrinacini Sen, Adv for R-1 in W.P.(C) 11227/2016. Mr.Ajay Digpaul, CGSC for R-1 in W.P.(C) 69/2017. Mr.Ruchir Mishra, Adv W.P.(C)1786/2017. Ms.Bharathi Raju, CGSC for R-1 in W.P.(C) 4481/2017, 4530/2017, 4580/2017, 4582/2017 & 4650/2017. Mr.Dev.P.Bhardwaj, CGSC for R-1 in W.P.(C) 5058...
Super Cassettes Industries Pvt Ltd vs.kumaon Broadband Company Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2019
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:28. h February, 2019 + CS(COMM) 1039/2016 and I.A. 14390/2014 SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. K. K. Khetan, Advocate (M:98103. 9109). KUMAON BROADBAND COMPANY PVT LTD ..... Defendant Through: None. versus CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) 1. The Plaintiff has filed the present suit seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of copyright, damages and rendition of accounts. The case of the Plaintiff is that it is the owner of a large repertoire of sound recordings and underlying works including literary and musical works. The Plaintiff has over 20,000 Hindi film and non-film songs and around 50,000 songs in regional languages in its library. The Plaintiff claims that it has launched a large number of well-known singers, music directors and video directors under its banner.2. The present suit is filed against the Defendant who is a cable operator operating u...
State (Gnct of Delhi) vs.vipin Alias Lalla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2019
+ $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:11. h February, 2019 Judgment pronounced on:_28th February, 2019 CRL. L. P. 445/2018 STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) ....... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for State with Inspector Vijay Kumar, PS New Usman Pur and W/SI Santosh, IO (PM Cell), Security PS New Usmanpur. VIPIN @ LALLA ....Respondent Through: Mr. Piyush Phuja, Advocate. Versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.1. By this petition under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter as Cr.P.C), the State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 28.03.2018 passed by the learned Special Court (POCSO ACT), ASJ-01, North East District, Karkardooma Courts Delhi in Session Case No.44631/2015 in FIR No.889/2014 registered at Police Station, New Usmanpur whereby the respondent Vipin @ Lalla was acquitted of the charges registered under Sections 363/366/342/376...
Mafatlal Finance Co. p.ltd. (Ph). Vs.pasupati Fabrics Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:28. 02.2019 CO.A(SB) 3/2006 $~CP-1 * % + MAFATLAL FINANCE CO. P.LTD. (PH)..... Appellant Through Mr.Manohar Lal Sharma, Ms. Suman and Mr.Utkarsh Mudotiya, Advs. versus PASUPATI FABRICS LTD. Through Mr.Vijay Shankar, Adv. for R-1. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. This appeal is filed under Section 10 (F) of the Companies Act seeking to impugn the order dated 29.04.2005 passed by the learned Company Law Board. The appellant had filed a petition before the Company Law Board under Section 111A read with Section 111 (4) of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking an order in favour of the appellant against the respondent company to rectify the shareholder register of the respondent Company and to delete the name from the ownership of 1,49,300 shares allotted to the appellant on the basis of prospectus dated 11.03.1996 containing misstatement. A declaration was also sought that the issue was not 1...
Bharat Kumar Goswami vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2019
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:28. 02.2019 BAIL APPLN. 300/2019 BHARAT KUMAR GOSWAMI versus STATE ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. V. Madhukar and Mr. Rakesh Sharma, Advs. For the Respondent: Mr. Hirein Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with SI B.P. Singh CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.234/2017 under Section 392/3Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 27/of the Arms Act registered at Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Delhi.2. The subject FIR was registered on the complaint of one Rishab Jain who contended that he collected approximately Rs. 11 lakhs from a trader and was taking it to his shop kept in a red colour bag which was kept in a scooty. It is alleged that when he along with his colleague were going on the road they were stopped by four boys on a motorcycle. They started fighting wi...
Ledvance Private Limited vs.gail (India) Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:04. 02.2019 Pronounced on:28. 02.2019 FAO (OS)(COMM) 284/2018, C.M. APPL.37455/2017 LEDVANCE PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Appellant Through : Sh. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Diwakar Maheshwari, Sh. Sanjeev and Ms. Shreyas Edupuganti, Advocates. Versus GAIL (INDIA) LIMITED ..... Respondent Through : Sh. Sridharan Ram Kumar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The question urged in this appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the Act) is that given the nature of the contract between the parties, could the Gas Authority of India (the respondent, hereafter referred to as GAIL) have validly encashed the bank guarantees furnished by Osram India (P) Ltd, the claimant (the name of which has undergone a change, and consequently would be referred to as Ledvance).2. The parties to this dispute entered into a Gas T...
Sushila Malge vs.raj Singh Bhatti & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:28. h February 2019. CS(OS) 124/2019, IA Nos.3117/2019 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) & 3118/2019 (for exemption) SUSHILA MALGE ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Jatin Rajput, Adv. Versus RAJ SINGH BHATTI & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 Through: None. ..... Defendants The plaintiff has instituted this suit for declaration, that the deed of settlement dated 3rd April, 2018 executed by her husband namely Sh. Suresh Babu Malge impleaded as defendant no.8 and by the defendant no.1 namely Sh. Raj Singh Bhatti on behalf of defendants 1 to 7 namely Sh. Raj Singh Bhatti, Smt. Sunita Bhatti, Sh. Umesh Bhatti, Smt. Anita Bhatti, Sh. Narender Bhatti, Sh. Papu Bhatti & M/s Mahamedha Estate Private Limited, is illegal, false, null and void ab initio and not binding on the plaintiff and for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from using the said deed of settlement dated 3rd April, 2018 in any manner whatsoever.2. The ...
D R vs.r S
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2019
$~28 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:28. h February, 2019 + MAT.APP.(F.C.)317/2018 D R R S ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.N. Pandey, Advocate Versus Through ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM.APPL504342018 (delay of 53 days) 1. This is an application filed by the applicant/appellant seeking condonation of 53 days delay in filing the present appeal. Despite service, none has chosen to appear on behalf of the respondent/husband. For the reasons stated, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.2. The application stands disposed of. MAT.APP.(F.C.)317/2018 3. Aggrieved by the decision of the Family Court dated 04.09.2018 by which a petition seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion under Section 13(1) (ia) & (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as HMA) has been rejected which has led to the filing of the present appeal. MAT.APP.(FC).317/2018 Pag...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »