Delhi Court September 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.
Sunil Bhalla & Ors. Vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4931/2019 Date of decision:27. 09.2019 ........ Petitioner $~60 * SUNIL BHALLA & ORS. Through Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. versus STATE & ANR. Through Mr. Izhar Ahmed, APP for State. ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Sanjeev Manchanda, Adv. for R- 2 Mr. Amit Kumar, SHO CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Vide the present petition, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.20/2017 dated 11/01/2017 registered at Police Station Binda Pur instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/4of the IPC and consequent proceedings arising therefrom.2. Notice issued. CRL.M.C. 4931/2019 Page 1 of 3 3. Notice is accepted by learned APP for the State and counsel for respondent no.2 and with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the present petition is taken up for final disposal.4.... Petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 got married on 29.04.2016 as per Hindu rites and rituals. Due to extreme incompatibilities between them, t...
State vs.jaffar Khan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A5412019 STATE JAFFAR KHAN ..... Appellant Through Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP for State versus Through Mr. Rajat Srivastava and Mohd. ..... Respondent Jarjish, Advocates Reserved on :13. h September, 2019 Date of Decision:27. h September, 2019 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J:1. Present leave petition has been filed by the State challenging the judgment dated 1st August, 2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-05 (Central District), Tis Hazari Courts in FIR No.460/2014 registered with Police Station IP Estate wherein the respondent-accused was acquitted of the charges under Sections 376(1) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, and was convicted under Sections 10 & 12 of POCSO Act and 354A IPC. The Trial Court vide order dated 6th August, 2018 sentenced the Page 1 of 13 CRL. A.541/2019 respondent-accused to rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section 10 of POC...
Great Food and Beverages Llp & Anr. Vs.mr. Yash Taneja
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:27. h September, 2019 CS(COMM) 266/2017 GREAT FOOD AND BEVERAGES LLP & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Represented by: Ms. Kangan Roda, Adv. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) MR. YASH TANEJA Represented by: Mr. Ritaj Kacker, Adv. ..... Defendant 1. In the present suit plaintiff No.1 claims itself to be a limited liability company existing under the laws of United Kingdom with its principal business in London, United Kingdom and plaintiff No.2 being its wholly owned subsidiary in India. The plaintiffs are manufacturing and selling beverages and ready to eat snacks for kids and youngster in a fun and innovative convenient way. The product portfolio of the plaintiffs comprises of reasonably priced frozen juice bars, flavoured popcorn, dip and lick lollypops and fruit juice drinks sold in various states in India under the brands FRUITCHILL, FRUTCHILL, CRACKY and LOLICK. The most popular produce of the plaintiff...
Jagdish Prasad & Son vs.krishan Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2019
$~37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:27. 09.2019 RC.REV. 108/2019 & & CM APPL.8438/2019, 24418/2019 & 30442/2019 JAGDISH PRASAD & SON versus KRISHAN SHARMA ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr.S.K.Jain, Adv. For the Respondent: Ms.Sonali Malhotra, Advocate. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner impugns order dated 13.11.2018, whereby, leave to defend application of the petitioner has been dismissed and an eviction order passed.2. Respondent had filed the subject eviction petition seeking eviction of the petitioner, on the ground of bonafide necessity under Section 14(1) (e) read with Section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, from bearing Shop Nos. 3 & 4 at IX/5896, Geeta Gali, Subhash Mohalla, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-31, more particularly shown RC.REV. 108/2019 Page 1 of 3 in red colour in the site plan annexed with the petitio...
Rajesh Mehta vs.jawahar Hans
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2019
$~58 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + RC.REV. 1/2019 Judgment delivered on:27. 09.2019 RAJESH MEHTA JAWAHAR HANS versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr.Kuldeep Balhara, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr.Parmod Kumar Singhal, Advocate. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) CM APPL.43588/2019 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. RC.REV. 1/2019 & CM APPL. 43586/2019 & 43587/2019 1. The Petition is listed for hearing because of fresh application filed by the... Petitioner. With the consent of parties the Revision Petition is taken up for final disposal. The next date of 21.01.2020 is cancelled.2.... Petitioner impugns order dated 13.08.2018, whereby, leave to RC.REV. 1/2019 Page 1 of 3 defend application of the petitioner has been dismissed and an eviction order passed.3. Respondent had filed the subject eviction petition seeking eviction of the petitione...
M/S Djb Infrastructures and Developers India Pvt. Ltd. Vs.state & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2019
$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:27. 09.2019 + CRL.M.C. 4924/2019 M/S DJB INFRASTRUCTURES AND DEVELOPERS INDIA PVT. LTD. Through Mr.Akhil Sachar, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus STATE & ORS. Through Mr.Tarang Shrivastava, APP for State. ........ RESPONDENTS Insp.Umesh Sharma EOW. Ms.Neha Jain, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT (ORAL) Crl. M.A. 37052/2019 1.2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. Crl.M.C.4924/2019 & Crl.M.A. 37053/2019 3. Notice issued.4. Notice is accepted by learned APP for the State and counsel for the respondent no.3 and with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the present petition is taken up for final disposal. CRL.M.C.4924/2019 Page 1 of 4 5. Vide the present petition, the petitioner/complainant seeks direction thereby to quash and set aside the order dated 09.09.2019 passed by learned ACMM-II, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in case no.18429-2018 bearing FIR ...
Sartaj & Ors vs.bahadur Singh & Ors (Sbi General Insurance Co Ltd)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2019
$~36 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + MAC.APP. 605/2018 Decided on:27. 09.2019 ..... Appellants SARTAJ & ORS Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate. versus BAHADUR SINGH & ORS (SBI GENERAL INSURACE CO LTD ) ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani and Mr. for Deepanshu Arora, Advocates insurance company. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(Oral) CM APPL. 43537/2019 (for early hearing) 1.2. 3. This application seeks early hearing of the appeal. For the reasons mentioned in the application, it is allowed. The application stands disposed-off. MAC.APP. 605/2018 4.5. At joint request, the appeal is taken up for disposal. This appeal impugns the award of compensation dated 31.05.2017 passed by the learned MACT in MACT Case No.4492on the ground that the requisite amounts under non-pecuniary heads have not been granted. MAC.APP. No.605/2018 Page 1 of 3 Furthermore, the amount for pecuniary compensation too is on the lesser side.6. The deceased was 49 years of ag...
Renewable Energy Developers Association of Andhra Pradesh vs.union of ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2019
$~43 * % + W.P.(C) 10530/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment :27. h September, 2019 RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPERS ASSOCIATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Rana Mukherjee, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Byprapaneni Suyodhan, Ms.Tatini Basu, Advts. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Maninder Acharya, ASG with Jetly, CGSC with and Mr.Vikram Mr.Viplav Acharya, Advt. Mr.J.K.Jethani, Director, MNRE. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM APPL. 43578/2019 (Exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.2. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 10530/2019 & CM APPL. 43577/2019 (interim direction) 3. The petitioner is an association of renewable energy developers in the state of Andhra Pradesh registered under the Andhra Pradesh Societies Act, 2001 bearing Registration No.250 of 2018. The... Petitioner Association consists of around 60 MSMEs (Micro, Sm...
Poonam Garg vs.ifci Venture Capital Funds Ltd Through Its Managing Dir ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:-17.09.2019. Date of Decision:-"27.09.2019. + W.P.(C) 9304/2019 & C.M. No.38360/2019 (stay) POONAM GARG ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj and Mr.Shubham Gairola, Advs. versus IFCI VENTURE CAPITAL FUNDS LTD THROUGH ITS MANGING DIRECTOR & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Prashanto Chandra Sen, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Nitin Dahiya and Mr.Raj Lakshmi Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI REKHA PALLI, J1 JUDGMENT The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of the order dated 04.07.2019 passed by the respondent no.1 rejecting the petitioners prayer for withdrawal of her notice of voluntary retirement from service dated 07.06.2019. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondents to permit her to continue in service till her superannuation.2. The petitioner, who joined the services of respondent no.1/IFCI Venture Capital Funds Ltd. (the Company for sho...
Hari Kishan Dhoot & Anr. Vs.satish Kumar Aggarwal & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2019
$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:27. 09.2019 RC.REV. 364/2018 & CM APPL.30537/2018 HARI KISHAN DHOOT & ANR ........ Petitioners versus SATISH KUMAR AGGARWAL & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner: Mr.B.Venkataraman, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr.Puneet Mahajan, Advocate. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner impugns order dated 24.04.2018, whereby, leave to defend application of the petitioner has been dismissed and an eviction order passed.2. Respondent had filed the subject eviction petition seeking eviction of the petitioner, on the ground of bonafide necessity under Section 14(1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, from Property No.213, First Floor, Gali Batasan, Chawri Bazar, Delhi-110006, Delhi, more particularly as shown in red colour in the site plan RC.REV. 364/2018 Page 1 of 2 annexed with the eviction petition.3. 4. Parties ...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »