Delhi Court August 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.
M/S. International Design and Engineering Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs.m/s. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-2019
$~24 to 29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision :13. 08.2019 + O.M.P. (COMM) 307/2019 M/S. INTERNATIONAL DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Ms.Anne Mathew, Adv. versus M/S. MGI (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.S.Ravishankar, Ms.Ruhini Dey, Advs. (25) O.M.P. (COMM) 308/2019 M/S. INTERNATIONAL DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Ms.Anne Mathew, Adv. versus M/S. MGI (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.S.Ravishankar, Ms.Ruhini Dey, Advs. (26) O.M.P. (COMM) 309/2019 M/S. INTERNATIONAL DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Ms.Anne Mathew, Adv. versus OMP (COMM)Nos.307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312/2019 Page 1 M/S. MGI (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.S.Ravishankar, Ms.Ruhini Dey, Advs. (27) O.M.P. (COMM) 310/2019 M/S. INTERNATIONAL DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Ms.Anne Mathew, Adv. versus M...
Delhi Transport Corporation vs.siri Krishan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:-"13.08.2019 + RFA No.53/2011 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Through: Mr.U.N. Tiwary, Adv. ..... Appellant versus SIRI KRISHAN Through: Mr.Rajiv Nanda, Adv. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI $~ * REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL) 1. The present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure impugns judgment and decree dated 12.07.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, (Central-13), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Civil Suit No.132/2008, whereunder the suit filed by the appellant seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.3,30,097/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 09.09.1998, from the respondent was dismissed on the grounds of limitation as well as on merits.2. The facts as necessary for adjudication of the appeal may be noted hereinbelow.3. The respondent while working as a Conductor with the appellant- Corporation was, based on the finding of a domestic enquiry, dismissed from s...
Rajesh Gupta vs.union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-2019
$~24 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:13. h August, 2019 + W.P.(C) 8783/2019 RAJESH GUPTA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Jitender Mehta, Advocate versus ........ RESPONDENTS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Through: Mr.Nikhil Majithia, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) C.M.36316-36317/2019 (exemption) 1. Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.2. Applications stand disposed of. W.P.(C) 8783/2019 & C.M.36315/2019 (stay) 3. This matter has been taken up upon mentioning before DB-I.4. Issue notice to show cause as to why the petition be not admitted. Counsel for respondent no.2 enters appearance on an advance copy and accepts notice.5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that there is urgency in the matter as the technical bid was opened on 09.08.2019 and on the same day, the petitioner received an email informing him that his bid stands rejected. He submits that...
Manjeet Singh vs.state n.c.t. Of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-2019
$~ 29 + CRL.A. 795/2002 Decided on:-"13th August, 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI MANJEET SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amit Khatana, Advocate versus STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP for State with SI Rajender Prasad, PS Delhi Cantt. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Darshan Kaur, daughter of Mahender Singh (PW-5) was married to the appellant, then serving in the Indian Army, on 08.11.1992. PW-5 hailed from village Khudda Alisher, which falls within the area of Union Territory of Chandigarh. The appellant, on the other hand, hailed from village Kharad of District Mohali (Punjab). During the relevant period, PW-5 was serving as a peon in Post Graduate Institute (PGI) of Medical Sciences at Chandigarh. On the other hand, father of the appellant was then working in Pant University located in district Nainital (now in Uttrakhand).2. After marriage, Darshan Kaur was taken to Nainital where she stayed with her ...
Ved Prakash Abbot vs.kishore K. Avarsekar & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-09-2019
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CONT.CAS (C) No.579/2017 VED PRAKASH ABBOT Reserved on :17. 05.2019 Pronounced on :09. 08.2019 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Advocate. versus KISHORE K. AVARSEKAR & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Jawahar Raja, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH JUDGMENT JYOTI SINGH, J.C.M. Appl. No.3887/2019 (for delay) 1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 9 days in filing rejoinder.2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 9 days in filing the rejoinder is condoned. C.M. stands disposed of. C.M. Appl. No.19227/2019 (for delay) 3. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 34 days in filing reply. CONT. CAS (C) NO.579/2017 Page 1 of 30 4. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 34 days in filing the reply is condoned. C.M. stands disposed of. CONT.CAS (C) No.579/2...
Argus Cosmetics Limited vs.rameshchandra R Pandey & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-09-2019
$~2 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 1147/2016 ARGUS COSMETICS LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Saurabh Srivastava, Mr. Ranjeet and Mr. Vaarish Singh Sidhu Sawlani, Advs. Versus RAMESHCHANDRA R PANDEY & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Neeraj Grover and Ms. Vasvi CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW Tapriya, Advs. ORDER0908.2019 % IA No.1405/2019 (of plaintiff u/S124of Trade Marks Act, 1999) 1. The counsel for the applicant/plaintiff and the counsel for the defendants have been heard.2. The applicant/plaintiff instituted this suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of its label mark Z in Class 3 by the defendants, by adopting a label mark also with the alphabets ZX and for ancillary reliefs.3. The suit was entertained, though no ex-parte injunction granted to the plaintiff owing to the delay on the part of the applicant/plaintiff in instituting the suit.4. The defendants, in their written statement disclosed registration in their own fav...
Sushil Kumar Sharma & Ors. Vs.govt. Of n.c.t Delhi & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-09-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: August 09, 2019 CRL.M.C. 3916/2019 & Crl.M.A. 33162/2019 SUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Ram Nath Kushwaha, Advocate. Versus GOVT. OF N.C.T DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmed, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.692/2018, under Sections 498-A/4of IPC, registered at Police Station Aman Vihar, Delhi is sought on the basis of mediated settlement of 28th November, 2018 and affidavit of 3rd August, 2019 of respondent No.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 on the basis of identity proof produced by her. Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute CRL.M.C. 3916/2019 Page 1 o...
Krishan Kumar vs.delhi Transport Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-09-2019
$~2 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:09. 08.2019 LPA672018 KRISHAN KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Advocate versus DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel for DTC with Mr. N.K. Singh & Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH JUDGMENT G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. The appellant is aggrieved by a common order dated 11.12.2017 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No.8184/2004 and W.P.(C) No.18045/2006.2. Before the rival submissions of the learned counsels for the parties can be considered, we deem it appropriate to outline some of the relevant facts, which have given rise to the filing of the present appeal. The appellant herein was employed as a Conductor with the respondent/DTC since the year 1984. An incident had taken place on 13.06.1992 when the appellant was on duty on Bus No.9130, which was travelling from Del...
M/S. Wide Impex vs.the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Import), Icd ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-09-2019
$~10 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 7997/2018 M/S. WIDE IMPEX ........ Petitioner Through: Ms. Anjali J.Manish, Ms. Nidhi Tomar and Ms. Shweta Dhaka, Advocates. versus THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT), ICD, TUGHLAKABAD, NEW DELHI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH % ORDER0908.2019 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. The two prayers in the present petition read as under: a. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to the... RESPONDENTS to unconditionally release the goods imported against bill of entry No.4355561 dated 11.12.2017 which was detained illegally and seized on 30.01.2018 in the absence of any Show Cause Notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 as per the provisions of Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962; and/or b. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to the... RESPONDENTS to provisionally release the goo...
Vaishnavi Building Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs.shain Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-09-2019
$~OS-4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:09. 08.2019 CS(COMM) 863/2018 VAISHNAVI BUILDING SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through Mr.Pradeep Singh, Adv. versus SHAIN KUMAR ..... Defendant Through Mr.Mritunjay Kr.Singh, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH % + JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) IA No.687/2019 1. This application is filed by the defendant under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC seeking recall/setting aside the judgment dated 15.11.2018.2. It is pleaded in the application that the defendant was served with summons of the present proceedings in July, 2018. However, the defendant could not file the written statement due to his ill health. It is further stated that the defendant is suffering from dementia (a mental disorder) for long because of which he tends to forget things. The defendant could not pursue the captioned suit due to this reason as he forgot to remember the date of hearing before this court. He also forgot to share information with regard to the capt...
- ‹ Prev
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- Next ›
- Last »