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.
Shyam Manohar Saxena vs.central Bureau of Investigation & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
* IN THE HIGH CO URT O F DE L HI AT NEW DE LHI % Judgment reserved on:12. h March, 2019 Judgment delivered on:01. t July, 2019 + CRL.REV.P. 1169/2018 SHYAM MANOHAR SAXENA ........ Petitioner versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS...... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Mr. Chiraag Khurana and Ms. Sowjhanya, Advocates. For the... RESPONDENTS : Mr. Anupam S. Sharma, Spl.P.P with Mr. Prakash Airan, Ms. Apoorva Ahuja and Mr. Parikshith Sharma, Advocates. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGEMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J CRL.REV.P. 1169/2018 & Crl.M.A.50396/2018 (stay) 1.... Petitioner impugns order dated 03.12.2018, whereby, the application of the petitioner under Section 91 read with Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.2. Charge sheet was filed against the petitioner under Section 120(B) read with Sections 420/468/471/409 IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act alleging CR...
Mrf Limited. Vs.metro Tyres Limited.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
$~ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 753/2017 MRF LIMITED. Through: Mr. Akhil Sibal, Senior Advocate ..... Plaintiff with Mr. DebarshiBhuyan, Advocate. versus METRO TYRES LIMITED. ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Pravin Anand with Ms. Prachi Agarwal and Mr. Rohan Sharma, Advocates Reserved on :06. h May, 2019 Date of Decision:01. t July, 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J I.A. 12770/2017 1. Important issues of law arise for consideration in the present case, namely, whether in a suit for copyright infringement of a cinematograph film, the infringing copy has to be an exact copy made by a process of duplication or a substantial/material copy. Further, whether the copyright infringement test as laid down in R.G. Anand v. M/s Deluxe Films and Ors. (1978) 4 SCC118with regard to literary works is CS (COMM) 753/2017 Page 1 of 46 applicable to cinematograph films and whether the expression to make a copy of the film means just to make a physical cop...
Vivekanand Shastri vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:7. h January, 2019 Decided on:1. t July, 2019 CRL.A. 389/2016 VIVEKANAND SHASTRI ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Hemant Singh, STATE Advocate versus Represented by: Mr. Ashok K. Garg, APP for ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA the State.1. Vivekanand Shastri challenges the impugned judgment dated 5th April, 2016 convicting him for offence punishable under Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short POCSO Act) and the order on sentence dated 7th April, 2016 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of 5,000/-, in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days.2. Assailing the conviction, Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that the prosecutrix in her statement stated that there was nobody present in the temple at the time of incident but the relatives stated that there was a katha of nine day...
H K Anand vs.s Gurcharan Singh Bhasin & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:28. h May, 2019 Pronounced on:01. t July, 2019 CM (M) 1201/2018 & CM APPL.40951/2018 H K ANAND ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Advocate with Mr. Wasim Ahsraf, Mr. Mohit Daulatani, Advocates. versus S GURCHARAN SINGH BHASIN & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. H. S. Arora, Advocate for R-1. % CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN JUDGMENT1 This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order dated 16.08.2018, whereby the Trial Court has allowed an application filed by the plaintiff in a pending suit (respondent no.1 herein) for amendment of the plaint and impleadment of the petitioner herein as a defendant in the suit. Facts 2. The suit (Civil Suit No.11634/2016 in the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, Central Delhi) was filed in October, 2004. The plaintiff had impleaded ten defendants including M/s S.S. Mota CM (M) 1201/2018 Page 1 of 18 Singh (Nila) Cha...
Yatendar Kumar Sharma vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~17. * + % W.P.(C.) No.6739/2019 & C.M. No.28309/2019 YATENDAR KUMAR SHARMA Date of Decision:01.07.2019 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. K.K. Sharma, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj, CGSC CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to assail his posting to Silchar on the ground that one of his two daughters is suffering from serious ailment. The petitioner submits that his daughter Navya, who is seven years old, is suffering from Smith Magenis Syndrome i.e. permanent intellectual disability since her birth. The petitioner further states that the petitioners daughter is also suffering from a squint in her eyes. She is also suffering from a cardiac ailment. She is undertaking treatment at AIIMS, New Delhi. The petitioner states that the disease from which his daughter is suffering...
M/S Radikal Agrotech Pvt Ltd and Ors vs.idbi Bank Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: May 23, 2019 Judgment delivered on: July 01, 2019 + W.P.(C) 7975/2016 M/S RADIKAL AGROTECH PVT LTD AND ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Ms. Manpreet Kaur, Adv. versus IDBI BANK LTD .... Respondent Through: Mr.Sumit Nagpal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT V. KAMESWAR RAO, J1 The present petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers:-"In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case and the submissions made herein above, the... Petitioners, most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: a) Allow the present Petition; b) Pass a writ of mandamus or certiorari any other appropriate writs/ orders quashing/setting aside the impugned publication dated 04.08.2016 published by the Respondent Bank with photographs of the... Petitioners in the 'Hindustan Times' and 'Navbharat Times'; c) Pass a writ prohibiting Respondent Bank from publishing photo...
Suraj Kanya Shikshalaya vs.lalita and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:20. 05.2019 Pronounced on:01. 07.2019 + W.P.(C) 7226/2017 & CM APPL. 29940/2017 SURAJ KANYA SHIKSHALAYA ........ Petitioner Through Mr. R. K. Saini with Mr. Ankit Singh, Advs. versus LALITA AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. M. Rais Farooqui, Adv. for R-1 Ms. Mini Pushkarna, Standing Counsel with Ms. Swagata Bhuyan, Mr. Shiva Pandey with Ms. Ritika Ganju, Advs. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT1 Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby quashing the order dated 13.07.2017 passed by Delhi School Tribunal in Appeal No.23/2015 filed by respondent no.1.2. The case of the petitioner is that there were vacancies in the school in the year 2015, accordingly the petitioner school approached respondent no.2 for filling up the vacancies. The Director of Education vide order dated W.P.(C) 7226/2017 Page 1 of 12 27.10.2014 allowed the petitioner to fulfil the vacant post of Primary Tea...
R L Varma & Sons (Huf) vs.p C Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on:24. h April, 2019 Judgment delivered on:01. t July, 2019 + CRL.REV.P. 438/2017 R L VARMA & SONS (HUF) P C SHARMA versus ........ Petitioner .....Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners :... Petitioner No.1 in person. For the Respondent : Mr.T.A.Francis and Mr.Mahesh Katyayan, Advs. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.1.... Petitioner impugns judgment dated 31.05.2017 whereby the Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal of the petitioner impugning order on conviction dated 10.03.2017 and order on sentence dated 20.03.2017 convicting the petitioner of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.2.... Petitioner who appears in person inter-alia contends that from the record it is clear that the statutory notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was neither addressed to the correct address nor served to the petitioner. Crl.R...
Sashidharan Kollery & Ors. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
* IN THE HIGH CO URT O F DE L HI AT NEW DE LHI % Judgment delivered on:01. t July, 2019 + CRL.REV.P. 630/2016 SASHIDHARAN KOLLERY & ORS. ........ Petitioners versus STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners : Ms. Rebecca John, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Siddharth Yadav and Mr. Chinmay Kanojia, Advocates For the... RESPONDENTS : Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State. Ms. Anandita Singh, Advocate for R-2. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGEMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J CRL.REV.P. 630/2016 & Crl.M.A.14823/2016 (stay) 1.... Petitioners impugn order on charge dated 25.07.2016, whereby, Trial Court has framed a charge against petitioner Nos.1 and 2, i.e., Mr. Sashidharan Kollery and Mr. Kabir Khattar under Sections 342/354/506 (II) read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code and against petitioner No.3 Mr. Yogesh Kumar under Section 506 (II) Indian Penal Code in FIR No.17/2014, Police Station Safdarjung Enclave. CRL. REV. P.630/2016 Page 1 of 1...
Harvesh Kumar & Ors. Vs.himanshu Prabhakar & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
* % + W.P.(C) 1738/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on:27. 02.2019 01.07.2019 UNION OF INDIA & ANR ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGSC and Mr.Farman Ali, Mr. Kunal Bhargava and Mr. Akash Mohan, Advocates. versus HIMANSHU PRABHAKAR & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. V.S.R. Krishna, Advocate for the respondents No.1, 11, 12, 40, 57 & 61. + W.P.(C) 4711/ 2017 HARVESH KUMAR & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate versus HIMANSHU PRABHAKAR & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. V.S.R. Krishna, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Prashanta Verma, Senior Central Govt. Counsel and Ms. Shalu Goswami, Advocate for respondent No.100/ UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA W.P.(C) 1738/2017 & 4711/2017 Page 1 of 42 JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The aforesaid writ petitions have been preferred by the petitioners to assail the common order dated 16.09.2016 passed by...
- ‹ Prev
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 75
- 76
- 77
- Next ›
- Last »