Delhi Court March 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. Satbir Singh & Anr. Vs.the Financial Commissioner & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:15thMarch, 2019 + W.P.(C) 541/2017 1. SH. SATBIR SINGH2 SH. SURINDER KUMAR ...Petitioners Through: Mr. Dhruv Sharma, Advocate versus with Ms. Saumya Das, Advocate.1. THE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER2 THE COLLECTOR3 SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE4 SH. OM PRAKASH ...Respondents Through: Mr. Manoranjan, Advocate for R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA I. S. MEHTA, J.JUDGMENT1 The petitioners are challenging the legality and validity of order dated 06.12.2016 passed by the Ld. Financial Commissioner in Case No.184/2012. W.P.(C) 541/2017 Page 1 of 10 2. Facts on record shows that one Dalel Singh S/o Ghisa Ram was recorded Bhumidar in respect of land forming part of Khasra No.75/3/2(1-15), 4/1(1-8) and 4/2(3-08) measuring approximately 6 Bighas and 11 Biswas in total, situated within the revenue estate of village Dhansa, Delhi. He was unmarried and was uncle of present petitioners. Dalel Singh executed a Will dated 30.10.1984 in fa...
Meera Goyal vs.state, Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: March 15, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 1718/2017 & CRL.M.A.7009/2017 + MEERA GOYAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vijay Aggarwal & Mr. Rohit P.Ranjan, Advocates Versus STATE, NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State Mr. Mohit Mathur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shailender Babbar & Ms. Manisha Parwan, Advocates for respondents No.2 & 3 CRL.M.C. 3142/2017 & CRL.M.As. 14920/2017; 14921/2017; 14923/2017; 14924/2017; 14925/2017 & 14926/2017 PRITI SARAF & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Mohit Mathur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shailender Babbar & Ms. Manisha Parwan, Advocates Versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State with Inspector Umesh Sharma Crl.M.C. 1718/2017 Crl.M.C. 3142/2017 Page 1 of 9 Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vijay Aggarwal & M...
Cimmco Ltd. Vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:09. 10.2018 Judgment pronounced on:15.03.2019 + O.M.P. (COMM) 297/2016 CIMMCO LTD. ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv with Mr. Ashish Verma and Mr. Aditya Gupta, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through Mr. V.S.R. Krishna, Mr. A.S. Indra Pratap Dateer and Dr. Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.Prefatory Facts 1. This is a petition preferred under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter referred to as 1996 Act) to assail the majority Award dated 3 February 2016. 1.1 Shorn of verbiage, the instant petition has been filed in the background of the following facts:2. On 27 July 1995, the respondent i.e. Union of India (hereafter referred to as UOI), had floated a tender for procurement by way of financial lease, 4000 wagons under a Build-Own-Lease-Transfer Scheme (in short BOLT Scheme). O.M.P. (COMM) No.297/2016 Pg. 1 of 33 The w...
S P D vs.k D
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~31 * % + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 77/2019 & CM APPL. 12299/2019 Date of Judgment:15. 03.2019 S P D K D ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate. versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Prabhjit Jauhar and Ms.Upasana Goel, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) Caveat No.263/2019 Since the learned counsel for the respondent-wife enters appearance, the caveat petition stands discharged. CM APPL. 12298/2019 (Exemption) 1.2. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. CM APPL. 12300/2019 (delay) 3. This is an application filed by appellant-husband seeking condonation of delay in filing the present appeal. MAT. APP (F.C.) No.77/2019 Page 1 of 9 4. Notice. Counsel for the non-applicant accepts notice. The prayer made in this application is not opposed. Accordingly, the delay in filing the present appeal is condoned.5. The application stands ...
Tata Chemicals Ltd. Vs.puro Wellness Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:16. h January, 2019 Date of decision:15. h March, 2019 TATA CHEMICALS LTD. CS (OS) 403/2018 ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Siddharth Sharma, Ms. Bani Dikshit and Ms. Anshula Laroiya, Advocates. (M:9818075966) PURO WELLNESS PVT. LTD. versus ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Rajiv Nayar and Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Senior Advocates with Mr. Vikas Mehta, Ms. Cauveri Birbal, Ms. Manjira and Mr. Vasanth, Advocates. (M:9354454983) CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh, J.I.A. 10934/2018 (u/O XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC) 1. The Plaintiff TATA Chemicals Ltd. has filed the present suit for perpetual injunction, rendition of accounts and damages against the Defendant Puro Wellness Pvt. Ltd. The Plaintiff is the manufacturer of TATA Salt. The Defendant manufactures Puro Healthy Salt. Plaintiffs case 2. TATA Salt has been manufactured by the Plaintiff since 1983 and enjoys a market share of 24% - 2...
Atul Kumar Sharma vs.state ( Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2019
$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:15. 03.2019 CRL.REV.P. 244/2016 ATUL KUMAR SHARMA versus STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Mridul Jain, Advocate with petitioner in person. For the Respondent : Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State. Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) JUDGMENT1... Petitioner impugns judgment dated 27.01.2016, whereby, the Appellate Court set aside the order of conviction under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act on the ground that the complaint was not filed immediately after the first notice of default was given to the respondent.2.... Petitioner had filed a complaint under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 inter alia contending that the cheque issued by the respondent had got dishonoured for insufficient funds.3. The Trial Court, by order ...
Sh. Vipin Mittal & Ors. Vs.state & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: March 15, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 1407/2019 SH. VIPIN MITTAL & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate Versus STATE & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.S. Oberoi, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with ASI Hari Shankar Mr. Y.P. Rana & Mr. Yatinder Pal Rana, Advocates with Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.91/2018, under Sections 498-A/4of IPC, registered at police station New Usmanpur, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 20th March, 2018 reached between the parties. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-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 Hari Shankar on the basis of identity proof produced by her. CRL.M.C. 1407/2019 Page 1 of 3 Respondent No.2 present in the Court, submits that the...
Din Bandhu Dass vs.delhi Tourism & Transportation Development Corporat ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2019
$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment:15. 03.2019 W.P.(C) 2654/2019 & CM APPL. 12291/2019 DIN BANDHU DASS ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Raman Kapur, Senior Advocate with Mr.M.M.Singh and Mr.S.K.Pal, Advocates. versus DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED (DTTDC) ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Anisha Upadhyaya, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM APPL. 12292/2019 (exemption) 1.2. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 2654/2019 & CM APPL. 12291/2019 3. This is a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner seeking issuance of writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction, directing the respondent to produce W.P.(C ) No.2654/2019 Page 1 of 7 the records relating to NIT No.GFS/365/2008-09/DTTDC/PF-II and also issuance of writ of mandamus or any other...
Horlicks Ltd & Anr vs.heinz India Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO(OS) (COMM) 309/2018 & CM APPL. 54176/2018 HORLICKS LTD & ANR ..... Appellants Through: Mr.Chander M.Lall, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Ankur Sangal, Ms.Pragya Mishra & Ms.Sucheta Roy, Advocates. Versus HEINZ INDIA PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate with Ms.Ishani Chandra, Mr.Ankit Rastogi and Ms.Shubhie Wahi, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA % ORDER1503.2019 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. This order is confined to one of the grounds raised in the present appeal under Section 13(1) of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 read with Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the CPC) and Section 10 of the High Courts Act, 1966. The appeal is directed against the order dated 17th December 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in IA No.13793 of 2017 in CS (Comm) No.808 of 2017. FAO (OS) (COMM) 309/2018 Page 1 of 26 2....
Rakesh vs.the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-15-2019
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:15. 03.2019 BAIL APPLN. 411/2019 RAKESH THE STATE versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr. Mithan Lal, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Hirein Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with SI Dheer Singh CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks Regular bail in FIR No.287/2018 under Sections 376/328/506 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Farsh Bazar, Delhi.2. The petitioner has been in custody since 04.09.2018. Investigation is complete and the chargesheet has already been filed.3. The allegations in the FIR made by the prosecutrix are that the petitioner was introduced to her family for the purpose of marriage and talks of her marriage were on with the petitioner. Subsequently, BAIL APPLN.411/2019 Page 1 of 3 the petitioner started calling her up regularly and they also started meeting. It i...
- ‹ Prev
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- Next ›
- Last »