Delhi Court February 2019 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2019 Page 35 of about 750 results (0.018 seconds)Airport Authority of India vs.mumbai International Airport Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI O.M.P. (COMM) 32/2019 & IA9782019 Reserved on:22. 01.2019 Date of decision :15. 02.2019 AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General with Mr.Raghavender Shankar, Mr.Karan Lahiri, Ms.Kanu Agarwal and Mr.Adit Khorana, Advs. versus MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr.P.Chidambaram Sr.Adv. with Mr.Ankur Chawla, Ms.Kanika Singh, Mr.R.K. Mohit Gupta, Ms.Pallavi Langar and Ms.Palak Vashist, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA1 This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) challenging the Arbitral Award dated 23.09.2018 passed unanimously by a three member Arbitral Tribunal.2. The dispute between the parties, though required reference of the Arbitral Tribunal and of this Court to various documents exchanged between the parties and meetings held by them for a period rangin...
Tag this Judgment!State of Nct of Delhi vs.mohd.hefajuddin
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 15, 2019 CRL.M.C. 5291/2017 & Crl.M.A. 20752/2017 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, Additional Standing Counsel for State with SI Rakesh Kumar Versus MOHD HEFAJUDDIN ..... Respondent Through: Mr. R.A. Worso Zimik, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Impugned order of 28th November, 2017 finds the FSL Report to be prima facie faulty and allows respondents application for retesting of sample in proceedings under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) relating to recovery of 1.5 kg of heroin from respondent. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for petitioner-State assails the impugned order by pointing out that the option of retesting is not to be granted as a matter of course and it has to be exercised within fifteen days of receiving of FSL report. To submit so, attention of this Court is drawn to Supreme Courts decision in Thana ...
Tag this Judgment!Narender Goyal vs.mahesh Kumar
Court: Delhi
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:15. h February, 2019 CRL.L.P. 135/2019 NARENDER GOYAL ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Satyam Pandey and Mr. Sinha, Kumar Vikash Advocates. Versus MAHESH KUMAR Represented by: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. No.3443/2019 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. Crl.M.A. No.3442/2019 (Delay) For the reasons stated in the application delay of 77 days in filing the leave to appeal petition is condoned. Application is disposed of. Crl.M.A. No.3444/2019 (Delay in Re-filing) For the reasons stated in the application delay of 43 days in re-filing the leave to appeal petition is condoned. Application is disposed of. CRL.L.P. 135/2019 1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 4th August 2018, whereby the CRL.L.P. 135/2019 Page 1 of 4 learned Metropolitan Magistrate acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act,...
Tag this Judgment!National Federation of Fishers Cooperatives Ltd Through Its Managing D ...
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:6. h December, 2018 Decided on:15. h February, 2019 + LPA4622016 & CM Appl.No.29811/2016 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FISHERS COOPERATIVES LTD THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR AND ANR.... Appellants Through: Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan, Senior Standing Counsel. Versus RAJENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. S.K.Das, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr. Arun Bhardwaj with Mr Nikhil Bhardwaj and Mr. Shashwat Sharma, Advocates for UOI. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: JUDGMENT1 This appeal by the National Federation of Fishers Cooperatives Limited (FISHCOPFED) and its Board of Directors (Appellants No.1 & 2 respectively) is directed against the judgment dated 22nd December, 2015 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing Writ Petition (C) No.5304/2008 filed by the Respondent No.1. By the said impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has set aside an order dated 18th June, 2008 passed ...
Tag this Judgment!Sachin Dutta vs.state
Court: Delhi
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:7. h February, 2019 Decided on:15. h February, 2019 BAIL APPLN. 2842/2018 SACHIN DUTTA ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Gurvinder Pal Singh, Mr. Rajmanagal Kumar and Mr. Sidharth Borah, Advocates. versus STATE Represented by: Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP with SI Umesh ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA Sharma.1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks bail in case FIR No.151/2015 under Sections 406/420/174A/120B IPC registered at PS EOW.2. Case of the prosecution against the petitioner based on the complaint of Narendra Barmecha is that in the year 2011 on the inducement of the petitioner and his parents who were all partners of M/s Balaji Construction Narendra Barmecha joined the firm as a partner and started making investment therein as also in their newly incorporated company M/s Balaji Build Serve Pvt. Ltd. The accused persons had purchased several immovable properties at different points of time in the na...
Tag this Judgment!Virendra Gaur vs.subhash Chander Tandon (Deceased) Thr Lrs
Court: Delhi
$~27 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Order:15. 02.2019 Tr. P. (C) No.181/2018 VIRENDRA GAUR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. R.C. Pathak, Advocate. Versus SUBHASH CHANDER TANDON (DECEASED) THR LRS .....Respondents Through: Mr. H. Rehman and Mr. Raj Kumar, Advs. for R1. Mr. Sidharth Joshi and Mr. Yukta Singh, Adv. for R2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL By this petition, the petitioner seeks transfer of petition being 1. RC/ARC No.937/2016; titled as Virendra Gaur Vs. Subhash Chander Tandon (since deceased) represented through his legal heirs from the court of Ms. Harleen Singh, Senior Civil Judge-cum-Rent Controller, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, to the Court of Rent Controller/Additional Rent Controller, Shahdara, Karkardooma, Delhi.2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the property in question falls in Shahdara District.3. The learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2 has no objection as the property in question...
Tag this Judgment!Satish vs.the State (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
$~8 & 9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:15. 02.2019 BAIL APPLN. 317/2019 SATISH ........ Petitioner versus THE STATE(GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent + BAIL APPLN. 318/2019 GANESH ........ Petitioner versus THE STATE(GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners : Mr.Gaurav Seth, Mr.Mohit Bhardwaj, Mr.Pankaj Gupta and Mr.Vipin Malik, Advs. For the Respondent: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State with ASI Anirudh, P.S.Kalyanpuri. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.51/2019 under Sections 308/3of the IPC, Police Station Kalyanpuri, Delhi.2. Status report has been filed in Bail APPLN.317/2019. Same is BAIL APPLN. 317 & 318/2019 Page 1 of 3 taken on record.3. Allegations in the FIR are that the complainant was attending the marriage of his nephew which was being held in a park and at about 8.30 PM they observ...
Tag this Judgment!Kulwant Singh Bagga vs.state (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 15, 2019 CRL.M.C. 869/2019 and CRL.M.A. 3475/2019 KULWANT SINGH BAGGA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Hitender Kapur, Advocate Versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with ASI Sunil Dutt Mr. Rahul Lather, Advocate with Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.341/2010, under Section 498A of IPC registered at police station Model Town, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 26th March, 2018 (Annexure-C). Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court is the complainant/first informant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by ASI Sunil Dutt on the basis of identity proof produced by her. Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicab...
Tag this Judgment!Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. Vs.shri Ramdhan Gupta and Anr.
Court: Delhi
$~29. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) 1558/2019 MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD. ........ Petitioner Date of Decision:15. 02.2019 Through: Mr. Suhail Dutt, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mohd. Faizal, Advs. SHRI RAMDHAN GUPTA AND ANR. versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajesh Gogna, CGSC with Mr. Upendra Sai, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. CHAWLA VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) CAV No.153/2019 1. The caveat has been listed. However, none appears for respondent No.1 Caveator. The caveat stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 1558/2019 & C.M. No.7217/2019 2. The MTNL has preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 06.09.2018 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (the Tribunal) in O.A. No.551/2017, whereby the Tribunal has allowed the Original Application preferred by respondent No.1 and set aside the letter dated 26.12.2014 issued by the petitioner rejecting the respondents representation. The Tribuna...
Tag this Judgment!Mahle Anand Filter Systems Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known as Mahle Filter S ...
Court: Delhi
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:15. h February, 2019. + ITA1592019 MAHLE ANAND FILTER SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MAHLE FILTER SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with ........ Petitioner Mr.Aniket D. Agrawal & Mr.Neeraj Jain, Advs. versus ACIT, CIRCLE-6(1), NEW DELHI ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar & Mr. Asheesh Jain, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) % 1. The assessee questions the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for A.Y. 2008-09 and submits that the question of law arises with respect to the disallowance of 5.8crores, made by the Revenue and upheld by all Appellate Authorities.2. The assessee inter alia had entered into a lease agreement with M/s.Anand Automotive Systems Ltd. As part of the lease agreement, it was required to pay 5.8 crores as security deposit. This amount was reflected in its balance sheet and in the ...
Tag this Judgment!