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.
Fincap Financial Corporation Ltd vs.r.v. Enterprises & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
$~1 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ARB.P. 796/2018 FINCAP FINANCIAL CORPORATION LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Ms. Rashi Bansal, Advocate (Mobile No.9811229212). versus R.V. ENTERPRISES & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Abhinav Hansaria, Advocate for R-2 (Mobile No.9810349842). Mr. Deepak Singh, Advocate for R-5 (Mobile No.9811798641). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA % 1. ORDER0102.2019 This is a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying to refer the disputes arising between the petitioner and the respondents to arbitration in terms of Clause VI (a) of the Hire Purchase Agreement dated 30.1.2018 entered into between the petitioner and the respondent no.1, respondent nos. 2 to 5 being the partners of the respondent no.1-partnership firm. This arbitration clause as per the Hire Purchase Agreement entered into between the parties reads as under:-"VI(a). All disputes, differences, and/or claims, arising out of this Hir...
Sunil vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
* % + SUNIL STATE IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:1. t February, 2019 CRL.A. 1024/2016 ....Appellant Represented by: Mr. M.A. Inayati, Ms. Meenu Sharma, Advocates versus .....Respondent Represented by: Mr. Rajni Gupta, APP for the State with Insp. M.P. Saini PS H.Q. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. By the present appeal, Sunil challenges the impugned judgment dated 9th December, 2014 convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC in FIR No.56/2013 registered at PS Haus Qazi and the order on sentence dated 18th December, 2014 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC.2. Process of law was set into motion on 7th April, 2013 when SI Shri Kishan along with Ct. Prakash reached Chatta Shahji, Chawri Bazaar pursuant to information received vide DD No.24A and 25A. On reaching the spot, they found shop No.2356 closed and came to know that the injur...
Pranati Swain vs.the State (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 01, 2019 CRL.M.C. 572/2019 PRANATI SWAIN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Neeraj K. Sharma and Mr. Pankaj Sharma, Advocates Versus THE STATE (GOVT.OF NCT DELHI )& ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) CRL.M.A. 2395/2019 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.A. 2396/2019 (delay) There is delay of 320 days in re-filing the accompanying petition. For the reasons stated in the application, it is allowed and the delay is condoned. The application is disposed of. CRL.M.C. 572/2019 Quashing of FIR No.483/2014, under Sectionsof IPC, CRL.M.C. 572/2019 Page 1 of 4 registered at police station Delhi Cantt., New Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit dated 17th February, 2018 (Annexure P-5) of respondent No.2 and that the accident in question had taken place due to bonafide error of jud...
Abhishek Nanda vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + BAIL APPLN. 2905/2018 Judgment delivered on:01. 02.2019 ABHISHEK NANDA STATE versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Anil Sharma with Mr. Arun Baali, Advocates. For the Respondent : Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State. SI Yogesh Sharma, PS Ashok Vihar. Mr. K.C. Jain with Ms. Sujata Kumari, Advocates for the complainant. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.167/2018 under Sections 406/498-A IPC, Police Station Ashok Vihar.2. 3. Subject dispute emanates out of a matrimonial dispute. Parties were referred to mediation by order dated 07.12.2018. Parties have settled their disputes through the process of mediation. Settlement Agreement dated 24.01.2019 has been executed and the same is placed on record. BAIL APPLN.2905/2018 Page 1 of 3 4. Parties, who are present in Court in person...
Mansoor Raza & Ors vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
$~8, 9, 10, 12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:01. February, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 315/2016 and Crl. M.A. 1392/2016 ASHISH MITTAL & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. N. Hariharan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Niyazi, Mr. Aditya, Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Mr. Prateek Bhalla, Mr. Varun Dewal and Ms. Mallika Chadha, Advocates versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State with SI Ravi Saini Mr. D. Anil Kumar, Advocate for R-2 + CRL.M.C. 1520/2016 and Crl. M.A. 6521/2016 SHOBIT KRISHNA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Hariharan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Niyazi, Mr. Aditya, Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Mr. Prateek Bhalla, Mr. Varun Dewal and Ms. Mallika Chadha, Advocates versus STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State with SI Ravi Saini Mr. D. Anil Kumar, Advocate for R-2 + CRL.M.C. 317/2016 and Crl. M.A. 1403/2016 Crl. M.C. No.315/2016 & conn. Page 1 of 6 MANSOOR RAZA & ORS ...
Maninder Singh Maker and Ors vs.ajit Singh Maker and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
$~ * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :7. h December, 2018 Date of decision :1. t February, 2019 CS (OS) 3121/2011 & I.A. 8178/2017 SUJAN MOHINDER CHARITABLE TRUST AND ANOTHER ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Abhimanyu Bhandari, Mr. Tanmaya Mehta, Mr. Prashant Mehta, Ms. Nattasha Garg, Mr. Alok Tripathi, Mr. Harsh Kumar and Ms. Aashima Advocates. (M:9654998650) Singhal, versus MOHINDER KAUR AND OTHERS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sandeep Mittal and Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, Advocates for D-1, 2 & 4 to 8. (M:9810005698) AND CS(OS) 558/2014 MANINDER SINGH MAKER AND ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mrs. Kajal Chandra, Mrs. Prerna Chopra and Mr. Viren Kapur, Advocates for P-1. (M:9810133536) Mr. Abhimanyu Bhandari, Mr. Tanmaya Mehta, Mr. Prashant Mehta, Ms. Nattasha Garg, Mr. Alok Tripathi, Mr. Harsh Kumar and Ms. Aashima Singhal, Advocates. versus AJIT SINGH MAKER AND ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sandeep Mittal and Mr. Sudarshan Ranjan, Advocates for D- 1, 2 & 4 to 8. (M...
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-17, vs.m/s Wadhawan Design ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:1st February, 2019. ITA662018 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-17, Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Std. Counsel. ........ Petitioner $~8 * + versus M/S WADHAWAN DESIGNS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Lalit Valecha & Ms. Divya Vishvapriya, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) % CM Appl. 2633/2018 (exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. ITA662018 1. The question of law framed in this case is as follows:-"Did the ITAT fall into error in setting aside the concurrent finding with respect to the disallowance of purchases worked out at 6,77,21,540/-, claimed by the assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case?. The relevant facts are that the assessee reported income for A.Y.2. 2010-11; during the course of scrutiny the AO noticed that the sum of 6,77,21,540/- were shown in the assessees books, ...
Mohd. Javed Saifi & Ors. Vs.the State & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 01, 2019 CRL.M.C. 562/2019 MOHD. JAVED SAIFI & ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Manoj Chauhan and Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocates Versus THE STATE & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with ASI Suphal Ram Mr. R.D. Singh, Advocate with Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Crl.M.A. 2338/2019 (Exemptions) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 562/2019 Quashing of FIR No.251/2017, under Sections 498-A/4of IPC & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at police station Harsh Vihar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Compromise Deed of 25th September, 2018 (Annexure P-3) reached between the parties. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State submits that is the complainant/first informant of FIR in question and she has been identified respondent No.2, present in the Court CRL. M.C. 562/2019 Page 1 of...
Ashish Mittal & Ors vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
$~8, 9, 10, 12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:01. February, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 315/2016 and Crl. M.A. 1392/2016 ASHISH MITTAL & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. N. Hariharan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Niyazi, Mr. Aditya, Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Mr. Prateek Bhalla, Mr. Varun Dewal and Ms. Mallika Chadha, Advocates versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State with SI Ravi Saini Mr. D. Anil Kumar, Advocate for R-2 + CRL.M.C. 1520/2016 and Crl. M.A. 6521/2016 SHOBIT KRISHNA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Hariharan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Niyazi, Mr. Aditya, Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Mr. Prateek Bhalla, Mr. Varun Dewal and Ms. Mallika Chadha, Advocates versus STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State with SI Ravi Saini Mr. D. Anil Kumar, Advocate for R-2 + CRL.M.C. 317/2016 and Crl. M.A. 1403/2016 Crl. M.C. No.315/2016 & conn. Page 1 of 6 MANSOOR RAZA & ORS ...
Indian Bank and Anr vs.regional Provident Fund Commissioner and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:01. 02.2019 + W.P.(C) 1580/2013 & CM No.2970/2013 (for stay) INDIAN BANK AND ANR Through Mr.S.R. Sharma, Adv. ........ Petitioners versus Through Ms.Inderjeet Sidhu, Adv. for R-1 & 2. ........ RESPONDENTS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER AND ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI REKHA PALLI, J1 Vide the present petition, the two petitioners/Indian Bank and its Chief Manager Shri N.K. Sharma, seek quashing of the order dated 27th February, 2013 as also the consequential show cause notice dated 28th February, 2013 issued by the respondent no.2/Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Faridabad. Vide the impugned notice dated 27th February, 2013, the petitioner no.2 was asked to show cause as to why he should not be arrested for his failure to pay the sum of Rs.95,11,346/- towards the outstanding provident fund dues of respondent no.3 in terms of the recovery notice dated 4th WP (C) No.1580.2013 Page ...
- ‹ Prev
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 73
- 74
- 75
- Next ›
- Last »