Delhi Court April 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.
Shamsher vs.the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-2019
$~11 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order Reserved on:12. h April, 2019 Order Pronounced on:24. h April, 2019 BAIL APPLN. 377/2019 SHAMSHER ...Appellant Through: Ms. Vagisha Kochar Advocate Versus THE STATE... RESPONDENTThrough: Mr. G.M Farooqui, APP for the State with SI Subhash Chander, PS-S.P. Badli, Delhi CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J BAIL APPLN. 377/2019 1. By way of the present petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.') the petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in FIR No.1107/2014 under Sectionsof the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and Sectionof the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'POCSO') registered at Police Station SP Badli, Delhi. The petitioner is stated to be in judicial custody since 01.10.2014. Status report is on record.2. The brief and necessary facts of the case...
Sanjay Kumar Jha vs.mahavir
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-2019
* + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: April 24, 2019 CRL.REV.P. 460/2018 & Crl.M.A. 32739/2018 SANJAY KUMAR JHA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Alok & Mr. Ranjan Roy, Advocates Versus Through: Nemo. ..... Respondent MADAN LAL CRL.REV.P. 461/2018 & Crl.M.A. 32738/2018 SANJAY KUMAR JHA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Alok & Mr. Ranjan Roy, Advocates MAHAVIR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Versus Through: Nemo. ..... Respondent ORDER (ORAL) In the above captioned two petitions the challenge is to petitioners conviction under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentence of simple imprisonment for six months and fine of 2,10,000/- each with default clause in the two complaints under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 relating to dishonouring of cheque of 1,50,000/- each. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that these two petitions are required to be heard together. Accordingly, these petitions have been h...
Union of India (Cpwd) vs.shapoorji Palonji & Co Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-2019
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:24. h April, 2019 + LPA2062019 & CM Nos. 13660-63/2019 UNION OF INDIA (CPWD) ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Rajesh Gogna, Standing Counsel for UOI. versus SHAPOORJI PALONJI & CO PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI JUDGMENT ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J.(ORAL) CM Nos. 13662-63/2019 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM No.13660/2019 (for condonation of delay) For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 38 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. LPA No.206/2019 page 1 of 24 LPA2062019 & CM No.13661/2019 (for stay) 1. The Central Public Works Department (CPWD), Ministry of Urban Development, Union of India has filed the present Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Delhi High Court challenging judgment dated 13.12.2018 rendered by the learned single Judge ...
M/S Camron Exports vs.commissioner of Customs Inland Container Depot & ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-2019
$~2 & 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:24. h April, 2019 + W.P.(C) 2417/2019 M/S CAMRON EXPORTS versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS INLAND CONTAINER DEPOT & ORS. + W.P.(C) 2523/2019 ELEGANT EXPORTS ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, INLAND CONTAINER DEPOT & ORS. Present: Mr.Akhil Krishan Maggu & Mr.Rishab Nagar, Advocates for ........ RESPONDENTS the... Petitioners. Mr.Harpreet Singh, Sr.Std.Counsel with Ms.Suhani Mathur, Advocate for the... RESPONDENTS. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) % 1. Issue notice. Mr.Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel accepts notice.2. The petitioner states that his bank accounts have been frozen [ICICI Bank Account No.25005500904 & IndusInd Bank Account No.201002412697]..3. The facts are that the respondent/Customs Authorities issued notices on 06.02.2019, to enquire into allegations of bogus addresses for ...
S S @ S G vs.R K S
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-2019
$~17 * % + MAT.APP(F.C.) 234/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:24. 04.2019 S S @ S G ..... Appellant R K S Through: Ms. Jyoti Sharma and Mr. Devdas, versus Advocates Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH JYOTI SINGH, J.(ORAL) CM APPL382852018 1. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 190 days in filing the appeal is condoned.2. The application stands disposed of. MAT.APP(F.C.) 234/2018 3. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant/wife assailing the judgement of the Family Court dated 29.01.2018 whereby the petition filed by the appellant/wife under section 13 (i) (ia) and (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as HMA) has been dismissed by the Family Court.4. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present appeal are that the marriage between the parties were solemnized on 26.03.2007 in Arya MAT.APP(F.C.)234/2018 Page 1 of 13...
Gourav & Anr. Vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: April 24, 2019 CRL.REV.P. 478/2019 & CRL.M.As. 8568/2019, 8641/2019 GOURAV & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Suhail, Advocate. STATE Versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Impugned order of 23rd February, 2019 puts petitioner on trial for the offence under Sections 3of IPC and 3of IPC in FIR No.308/2016, registered at Police Station Keshav Puram, Delhi. Learned counsel for petitioners assails the impugned order on the ground that MLC of the injured persons does not specify the nature of injury sustained by them and the presence of petitioners at the spot is not established. It is submitted that petitioners have not been named in the FIR but on the same day, the name of the petitioners have been inserted by way of injureds supplementary statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-S...
Jagdish Chander vs.kapoor Jewel Mines Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: April 24, 2019 CRL.M.C. 3663/2017 JAGDISH CHANDER ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rakesh Taneja, Advocate Versus KAPOOR JEWEL MINES PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Harjinder Singh & Mr. Ravinder Singh, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is sought in this petition by recourse to Section 142 (1) (a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that two cheques in question were issued in the name of Raj Pal Kapoor but the complaint has been filed by M/S Kapoor Jewel Mines (P) Ltd. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that there are averments in the complaint (Annexure P-1) that respondent is holder of the cheques in question in due course. So, it is submitted by petitioners counsel that the complaint (Annexure P-1) is defective and on its basis, petitioner cannot be prosecuted. Attentio...
Rajiv Oberoi vs.jatinder Oberoi & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-24-2019
$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:24. 04.2019 + RFA(OS) 7/2018 RAJIV OBEROI Through: Mr. Alok Tripathi, Advocate with ..... Appellant versus appellant in person. JATINDER OBEROI & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja and Ms. Chandrika Gupta, Advocates for R-2 with R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the final order dated 29.11.2017 by which a decree for partition has been passed. The parties are open for sale of the property. In fact, counsel for the appellant, on instructions from the appellant who is present in person, submits that in case the value of the property is Rs.8 crores (according to the respondent), he is willing to accept Rs.4 crores and if Rs.4 crores are paid to him, he will transfer his rights. In case the respondent is able to find a buyer for the said amount, appellant is open to accept the same, however, in case the...
Gillette India Ltd. Vs.commissioner of Customs & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-23-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on: April 23, 2019 W.P. (C) No.1735/2016, C.M. APPL. No.7433/2016 + GILLETTE INDIA LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Jayant K. Mehta, Mr. Shaurya Kuthiala, Mr. Kapil Arora, Ms. Nayan Jain, Ms. Suveni Bhagat, Mr. Rahul Kukreja, Mr. Shubhankar, Mr. Sajal Jain, Advocates. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sameer Jain, Standing Counsel, CBEC, Mr. Angad Sandhu, Mr. Suvigya Awasthy, Ms. Anu Suia, Mr.Karan Valecha, Mr. Anant Gupta, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. The question that has been referred to this larger Bench for decision by an order dated 9th March, 2016 of the Division Bench (DB) of this Court in the present petition is as follows: Notwithstanding that an importer may not have made the payment of W.P. (C) No.1735/2016 Page 1 of 28 the redemption fine duty interest and penalty within the time stip...
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.smt. Sunita and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-23-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:23rdApril, 2019 + MAC. APP. 943/2018 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ...Appellant Through: Mr. S.P. Jain, Advocate with Mr. Himanshu Gambhir, Mr. Abhijit Chakravarty and Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Advocates. versus 1. SMT. SUNITA2 Ms. RITIKA3 MASTER VARUN4 MASTER VINEET5 SMT. PARKASHI6 SH. RAJENDRA KUMAR (DRIVER) 7. SH. ARUN KUMAR SHARMA (OWNER) ...Respondents Through: Mr. Munish Kumar Sharma, Advocate for R-1 to R-5. Mr. Neeraj Kumar Jha, Advocate for R-6 to R-7. + MAC. APP. 117/2019 1. ARUN KUMAR GUPTA2 RAJENDRA KUMAR... APPELLANTSThrough: Mr. Neeraj Kumar Jha, Advocate. versus 1. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.2. SMT. SUNITA3 Ms. RITIKA4 MASTER VARUN MAC. APP. 943/2018 & 117/2019 Page 1 of 13 5. MASTER VINEET6 SMT. PARKASHI ...Respondents Through: Mr. S.P. Jain, Advocate with Mr. Himanshu Gambhir, Mr. Abhijit Chakravarty and Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Munish Kumar Sharma, Advocate for R-2 to R CORAM: HON'BLE MR...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »