Delhi Court July 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.
Monu Rajput vs.state & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2019
5 $~ * + W.P.(CRL) 1879/2019 & CRL.M.A. 30835/2019 MONU RAJPUT STATE & ORS. versus ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Amritananda Chakravorty, Advocate with Mr. Mihir Samson, Ms. Shreya Munoth and Mr. Pradip K. Singh, Advocates. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Rahul Mehra, Advocate with Mr. Chaitanya Gosain, Advocate for State with Insp. Sushma Saxena, PS Mehrauli, ASI Lalit Kumar, % Date of Decision:12. h July, 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. In the present petition for writ of habeas corpus it is averred that the petitioner, who was assigned a female gender by birth, is now a transgender male and is a close friend of Ms. Manish @ Neeshu, presently 20 years of age. It is alleged that Ms. Manish @ Neeshu has been illegally detained against her will by or under the instructions of respondents No.4 and 5, her Chacha and Bua respectively since 07th July, 2019. W.P.(C...
State vs.kundan Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:12. h July, 2019 CRL.L.P. 573/2017 STATE ........ Petitioner Represented by: Rajni Gupta, APP for the State along with SI Badlu Ram, PS Janakpuri versus KUNDAN KUMAR Represented by: Mr. Rahul Rohtagi and Syed ..... Respondent Ajmal Hasan, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 22nd March 2017 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the respondent for the offences punishable under SectionsIPC, the State has preferred the present leave petition.2. Process of law was set into motion on the complaint of the prosecutrix wherein she stated that she came to Delhi in February 2014 and was working as a nurse at a Nursing home in Janakpuri, New Delhi from past one year. One boy namely Kundan used to work as a receptionist in the same nursing home who proposed to marry her multiple times but she refused by stating that she had a boyfriend. On 17th May 2016 at...
Shiv Kumar vs.lt. Governor & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~1 * + W.P.(CRL) 1665/2019 & CRL.M.A. 12083/2019 SHIV KUMAR ........ Petitioner % Through: Mr.Suraj Rathi, Advocate. versus LT. GOVERNOR & ORS Through: Ms.Kamna Vohra, ASC for the State. ........ RESPONDENTS Date of Decision:12. h July, 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) JUDGMENT1 Present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. challenging the constitutional validity of Rule 2(30) read with Rule 1252(a) of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 which came into effect on 01st November, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules 2018) on the ground that they are based on two erroneous legal opinions dated 01st July, 2013 and 18th May, 2018 of the Law and Justice Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi. W.P.(CRL.) 1665/2019 Page 1 of 3 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Department of Law and Justice has misconstr...
Dinesh Kumar Dabi & Ors. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: July 12, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 3301/2019 DINESH KUMAR DABI & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. R.P. Tiwari, Advocate Versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with ASI Rajbir Singh. Mr. Vijay Datt Gahtori, Advocate with Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.40/2017, under Sections 406/468-A/34 of IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Bazar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 25th February, 2019 (Annexure P-2). 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 Rajbir Singh 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 amicably reso...
Xerox Corporation & Anr vs.p K Khansaheb & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2019
$~8 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:12. h July, 2019. XEROX CORPORATION & ANR ..... Plaintiffs CS (COMM) 1196/2016 and I.A. 7727/2019 Through: Ms. Shwetasree Majumder and Ms. (M: Eva Bishwal, Advocates 8130676006). versus P K KHANSAHEB & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Ravi Gupta, Sr. Advocate, Mr. N.K. Bhardwaj, Mr. Bikash Ghorai and Mr. Sachin Jain, Advocates (M:98101. 7174). CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) 1. The present suit has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, dilution, tarnishment, damages etc. The Plaintiff claims ownership in the trademark XEROX which was coined by Haloid Company, the predecessor of the Plaintiff-company, in the year 1948. As per the Plaintiff, the said mark has been used extensively across the globe including in India. The word mark XEROX is an invented mark which has been coined by the Plaintiff by combining the Greek words f...
Vindhyachal Mishra @ Dube Ji vs.state of Nct Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2019
$~19 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"12th July, 2019 Crl.M.C.480/2019 & Crl.M.A. 2062/2019 VINDHYACHAL MISHRA @ DUBE JI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Arvind Kr. Shukla, Mr. versus STATE OF NCT DELHI Through: Nihal Ahmad, Mr. Kunal Yadav, Ms. Neena, Ms. Zia Ahmed & Ms. Reetu Sharma, Advs. ..... Respondent Mr. Amit Chadha, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is facing proceedings in a criminal case arising out of report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) submitted upon conclusion of investigation into first information report (FIR) No.176/2018 of police station Crime Branch of Delhi Police involving offences allegedly committed under Section 20, 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). Concededly, after cognizance was taken by the special Court, the process was issued against him in terms of Section 204 Cr.P.C. The case, it appears, is at the ...
Shri Gopal Krishan Dua vs.shri Darshan Kumar Dua & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2019
$~OS-8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of decision:12. 07.2019 CS(OS) 338/2018 SHRI GOPAL KRISHAN DUA ..... Plaintiff Through Mr.P. S. Bindra and Mr.G.S.Patwalia, Advs. versus SHRI DARSHAN KUMAR DUA & ANR. ..... Defendants Through Mr.Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Harsh Kaushik, Ms.Nikita Chitale, Mr.Vinay and Mr. Aishwarya Vikram, Advs. for D-1 to D-4. Tripathi CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) IA No.9112/2018 1. This application is filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC seeking an ex-parte interim injunction.2. This matter came up for hearing on 23.07.2018 when this court passed an interim order directing the parties to maintain status quo regarding title and possession of the suit properties till further orders.3. The accompanying suit is filed by the plaintiff seeking a decree of declaration declaring the Will dated 11.04.1998 said to have been executed by deceased father of the plaintiff late Sh.Chanderbhan Dua as null and void and havin...
Shanti Kaur vs.delhi Transport Corporation & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2019
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:12. h July, 2019 Through: Ms. Sunita Arora, Advocate. ........ Petitioner SHANTI KAUR + W.P.(C) 827/2012 & CM APPLN. 1854/2012 versus DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. U.N. Tiwary, Advocate for DTC.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT The petitioner has challenged the award dated 05th October, 2011 whereby the Labour Court dismissed the petitioners claim.2. The petitioner was appointed as Class-IV employee by the respondent No.1 on 16th January, 1981 after the death of her husband. The petitioner stopped coming to the office from 11th December, 1994 whereupon the respondent No.1 issued a charge sheet to the petitioner on the ground of illegal absence from the duty with effect from 11th December, 1994. The inquiry officer held the charge proved vide report dated 31st May, 1995. The respondent No.2 accepted the report and removed the petitioner from service on 27th July, 1995. W...
Manoj Kumar & Ors. Vs.state & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: July 12, 2019 CRL.M.C. 3314/2019 & Crl.M.A. 30864/2019 MANOJ KUMAR & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Rashid Khan, Advocate Versus STATE & ORS. Through: Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public ........ RESPONDENTS Prosecutor for respondent No.1- State with SI Manoj Mr. Ankush Chauhan, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.1520/2015, under Section 3of IPC, registered at Police Station Malviya Nagar, New Delhi is sought on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared between the parties. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State submits that respondent No.5 is a minor and she is represented through her mother- respondent No.3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits that respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are present in the Court and they have been i...
Neelam Dubey vs.rani Pandey
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-12-2019
$~5 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:12th July, 2019 RC. REV. 404/2019, CM Nos. 30140-41/2019 NEELAM DUBEY ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. A.K. Mishra, Advocate versus RANI PANDEY Through: CORAM: ..... Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI JUDGMENT ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI (ORAL) 1. By way of this petition filed under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (DRC Act for short) the petitioner impugns judgment dated 18.01.2019 whereby the Rent Control Tribunal (RCT for short) has allowed an appeal, thereby reversing judgment dated 12.04.2017 made by the learned Additional Rent Controller (ARC for short) dismissing the eviction petition filed under section 14(1)(a) of the DRC Act. By way of the impugned judgment, the RCT has allowed eviction on the ground available under section 14(1)(a) of the DRC Act, namely non-payment of rent. The premises that is subject matter of the proceedings is property bearing No.5, I- Block, Jaitpur Extension...
- ‹ Prev
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- Next ›
- Last »