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.
Shiva @ Chandrika vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
$~ * + % 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 1284/2014 & CRL.M.A.13864/2015 SHIVA @ CHANDRIKA ..... Appellant STATE Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Adv. (DHCLSC) with Mrs. Pinky Dubey, Mr. Saurabh Kumar and Ms. Harpreet Kalsi, Advs. versus ..... Respondent Through Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP for State with SI Surender Singh, PS Sector-23, Dwarka, Delhi CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT0107.2019 This appeal, at the instance of the accused Shiva @ Chandrika, calls into question judgment, dated 24th March, 2014, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (hereinafter referred to as the learned ASJ), convicting the appellant under Sections 344/376/376D/323/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the IPC), as well as the consequent order, dated 29th March, 2014, whereby the learned ASJ has sentenced the appellant to (i) 3 years rigorous imprisonment (RI) with fine of 5000/, for the offence under Section 344, IPC, with default sent...
Ongc Petro Additions Limited vs.tecnimont s.p.a. & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:25th May 2019 Pronounced on:01. t July 2019 O.M.P. (COMM) 196/2019 & I.A. 7134/2019 ONGC PETRO ADDITIONS LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through: Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Senior Advocate with Mr. K.R. Sasiprabhu, Mr. Robin V.S. and Mr. Aditya Swaroop, Advocates. TECNIMONT S.P.A. & ANR. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ritin Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhipsit Mishra, Mr. Aabhas Kshetarpal, Mr. SB Arjun and Ms. Ishita Bist, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA JUDGMENT SANJEEV NARULA, J1 The... Petitioner-OPaL has filed the present petition challenging the interim order dated 10th May 2019 (Impugned Order) passed by the Arbitral Tribunal in an international commercial arbitration. By virtue of the impugned order, OPals application under Section 19 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) for placing additional documents and evidence on record (Documents) has been rejected by the Arbitral Tribunal. O.M.P. (COMM) 196/2...
Heera Singh vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) 2934/2013 % 1. HEERA SINGH Through: Mr. I.C. Mishra, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Vivek Goyal, CGSC for R1 and R-2 Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, Mr. Siddharth Garg and Ms. Pratishtha Vij, Advs. for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT0107.2019 Following almost two centuries of hegemonic British rule, India attained independence on 15th August, 1947. Various schemes were introduced, by the Indian Government, to commemorate those who had shed their blood and sweat for the countrys struggle for independence, one among them being the SSS Pension Scheme relating to Freedom Fighters Pension.2. The first scheme, providing for grant of pension to freedom fighters and their family members, was originally introduced in 1973, and was substituted by a fresh scheme, which came to be known as the Swatantrata Sainik Samman (SSS) Pension Scheme, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as t...
Captain Arvind Kathpalia vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: March 28, 2019 Judgment Delivered on:1. t July, 2019 BAIL APPLN. 2935/2018 CAPTAIN ARVIND KATHPALIA ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Ramesh Gupta, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Rajiv Mohan, Mr.Abhimanyu Kampani and Mr.Tejasv Mehra, Advocates STATE versus ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Rajni Gupta, APP for the State with Insp.Prashant Yadav, PS IGI Airport Mr.Adit S.Pujari and Ms.Surabhi Dhar, Advocates for the complainant/intervener CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.475/2018 under Sections 201/204/465/466/471/506/202/217/279/280/ 120-B IPC and Section 11 of the Aircraft Act registered at PS IGI Airport.2. The abovenoted FIR was registered on 24th August, 2018 pursuant to the directions of the learned ACMM, Patiala House Courts under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on a complaint filed by the Indian Commercial Pilots Association. The ...
Rahul vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + ANAND STATE + RAHUL STATE Reserved on:29. h April, 2019 Decided on:1. t July, 2019 CRL.A. 1064/2017 Represented by: Ms. Sunita Arora, Advocate ..... Appellant versus Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP ..... Respondent for the State with SI Prempal Singh, PS Seelampur CRL.A. 389/2018 Represented by: Mr. Kartickay Mathur and Mr. ..... Appellant Sanket Gupta, Advocates versus Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP ..... Respondent for the State with SI Prempal Singh, PS Seelampur CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 Anand and Rahul challenge the impugned judgment dated 10th October 2017 convicting them for offences punishable under Section 3IPC and the order on sentence dated 12th October 2017 directing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months each. Crl.A.1064/2017 & Crl.A.389/2018 Page...
Sumit Kumar Pandey vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
* IN THE HIGH CO URT O F DE L HI AT NEW DE LHI % Judgment reserved on:10. h April, 2019 Judgment delivered on:01. t July, 2019 + CRL.REV.P. 760/2016 SUMIT KUMAR PANDEY versus STATE ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr.Parag Chawla, Adv. For the... RESPONDENTS: Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J1... Petitioner impugns order on charge dated 01.06.2016 whereby charge has been framed against the petitioner under Section 364A read with Section 34 IPC and Section 170 IPC in case FIR No.66/2016, P.S. Adarsh Nagar.2. Subject FIR was registered on the complaint of Sh. Kapil Nagpal who contended that he runs a shop which deals in food supplements. It is alleged that on 30.01.2016 at about 7 PM two persons came into his shop and asked for food supplements and they CRL.REV. P..760/2016 Page 1 of 6 asked him to speak to their coach. He spoke to the coach who gave h...
Gurpreet Singh vs.delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:01. 07.2019 + W.P.(C) 1023/2012 & CM APPL. Nos.2246/2012, 7202/2015 GURMEET SINGH ........ Petitioner Versus DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD ..... Respondent AND + W.P.(C) 1024/2012 & CM APPL. Nos.2248/2012, 7201/2015 GURPREET SINGH ........ Petitioner Versus DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Dubey, Ms. Manmeet Arora and Mr. Keshav Sehgal, Advocates. : Mr Pushkar Sood, Advocate. For the Respondent CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioners claim to be project affected persons (PAPs) due to implementation of the Delhi Mass Rapid Transit System (MRTS) Project and have filed the present petition, inter alia, praying for rehabilitation as per the Relocation and Rehabilitation Policy in respect of the Project Affected Persons of all Categories due to the W.P.(C) 1023-1024/2012 Page 1 of 19 Impleme...
M/S S & P Infrastructure Developers (P) Ltd. Vs.national Highways & In ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:01. 07.2019 + W.P. (C) 2130/2019 and CM APPL. 9975/2019 & 17160/2019 M/S S & P INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPERS (P) LTD. ........ Petitioner versus NATIONAL HIGHWAYS & INFRASTUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. (NHIDCL) ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr. Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Anusuya Salwan, Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaturvedi, Mr. Ghanshyam Thakur, Mr. Raghvendra Upadhyay and Ms. Nikita Salwan, Advocates. For the Respondent : Mr. Debal Banerjee, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manu Beri, Mr. Varun Shankar Bose, Advocates with Mr. Anil Jha, Legal Executive. CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner has filed the present petition, impugning an order dated 18.02.2019 issued by the respondent (hereafter referred to as NHIDCL), whereby the petitioner was debarred for a period of two years from participating in any work connected with NHIDCL.2. The petitioner sub...
Cbi vs.dr. As Narayan Rao
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:14th August, 2018 Decided on:1. t July, 2019 CRL.A. 382/2017 CBI Represented by: Ms. Rajdipa Behrua, SPP for ..... Appellant the CBI with Mr. Philomon Kani, Ms. Kriti Handa, Ms. Hansika Sahu, Ms. Damini K. and Mr. Ashray Behrua, Advocates with Inspector H.V. Attri ..... Respondent DR. AS NARAYAN RAO versus Represented by: Mr. Raj Kamal with Mr. Benant Noor Singh Marok, Mr.Dinesh Malik, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 By the present appeal, CBI challenges the impugned judgment dated 11th December 2015 acquitting the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 7 & 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short PC Act).2. Briefly stated, prosecution case is that on 29th January 2009, V. Swaminathan, Jr. Vice President of M/s Titanium Taltalum Products Ltd, Chennai made a complaint against the respondent who was then working as Director (S&T) RAW, Cabinet Secretariat. As p...
Land and Building Department Govt of Nct of Delhi vs.lalit Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-2019
$~4 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:01. 07.2019 LPA4202019 with CM No.28812/2019, CM No.28813/2019 and CM No.28814/2019 LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT GOVT OF NCT OF ..... Appellant DELHI Through: Ms. Ruchika Rathi, Adv. with versus Mr. Deepak Biswas, Adv. LALIT KUMAR Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral) CM No.28814/2019 (exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM No.28813/2019 (for condonation of delay) 2. This civil miscellaneous application has been preferred for condonation of delay of 347 days in preferring the Letters Patent Appeal.3. Looking to the reasons stated in this civil miscellaneous application, there are reasonable reasons for condonation of delay. We, therefore, condone the delay in preferring the LPA.4. This civil miscellaneous application is allowed and disposed of. LPA No.420/2019 5. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by t...
- ‹ Prev
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 76
- 77
- Next ›
- Last »