Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-23-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision :23. 04.2013 + CS(OS) 122/2011 CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms.Bitika Sharma and Ms.Anusuya Nigam, Advs. versus MEDIPOL PHARMACEUTICAL INDIA PVT. LTD. & ANR. ..... Defendants Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trade mark PANTODAC, passing off, dilusion, damages, rendition of accounts, delivery up, etc. against the defendants.2. Summons in the suit and notice in the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 were issued on 01.02.2011 and on the same day an ex parte ad interim injunction was also granted in favour of the plaintiff whereby defendant no.1 was restrained from using the trademark PANDOPOL or any other mark which is identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs registered trademark PANTODAC. Written statement was filed by the defendants on 07.05.2011. Admiss...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-13-2014
$~16. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision :13. h May, 2014 % + CS(OS) 253/2012 JOCKEY INTERNATIONAL INC AND ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through : Mr.Nischal Anand, Adv. versus R CHANDRA MOHAN AND ORS ..... Defendants Through : Mr.Jaspreet Singh, Adv. for D-1 to D-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. Present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for infringement of trademark, passing off, dilution, tarnishment, unfair competition, damages and rendition of accounts. Summons were issued in the suit on 01.02.2012. On an application for appointment of Local Commissioner moved by the plaintiffs, two Local Commissioners were appointed in the matter. Summons were issued to defendant No.6 on several dates and was finally served through publication. Despite service none appeared for defendant No.6, consequently defendant No.6 was proceeded ex parte on 20.03.2014.2. On 06.05.2014, plaintiffs and defendants No.4, 5 and 7 filed application under Order 23 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-22-2014
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3755/2013 RAKESH KUMAR AGGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through Ms. Archana Ramesh, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI ORDER % 22.07.2014 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 17th February, 2012 passed by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal whereby the learned Armed Forces Tribunal dismissed the OA filed by the petitioner on the ground that there was an inordinate delay on the part of the petitioner in challenging the order dated 23rd April, 2004 passed by the respondents.2. Addressing arguments in support of the present petition, Ms. Archana Ramesh, counsel for the petitioner has taken a stand that the case of the petitioner relates to grant of disability pension which he has claimed from the date ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-26-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: September 26.09.2014 + CRL.A. 386/2011 BALJEET SINGH & ANR. Through ..... Appellants Mr.Vikas Pahwa, Sr. Advocate with Mr. B. Badrinath, Advocate versus STATE Through + CRL.A. 486/2011 NIRMALA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. M.N. Dudeja, APP for the State with Insp./SHO Raj Kumar & SI/IO Pradeep Kumar, PS Nangloi ..... Appellant Mr.N. Hariharan, Senior Advocate with Mr.Varun Deswal, Mr.Vaibhav Sharma, Advocates versus STATE OF DELHI Through ..... Respondent Mr. M.N. Dudeja, APP for the State with Insp./SHO Raj Kumar & SI/IO Pradeep Kumar, PS Nangloi Mr. Ashok Drall, Advocate for Complainant + CRL.A. 487/2011 RAJESH & ANR. Through versus STATE OF DELHI Through + CRL.A. 1080/2011 PUSHPA DEVI Through ..... Appellants Mr. Anupam S. Sharma, Advocate ..... Respondent Mr. M.N. Dudeja, APP for the State with Insp./SHO Raj Kumar & SI/IO Pradeep Kumar, PS Nangloi Mr. Ashok Drall, Advocate for Complainant ..... Appellant Mr. Ashok Drall...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 21, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: July 24, 2014 % + CRL.A. 791/2000 SITA RAM Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Saurabh Kansal, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Three accused named Dhanvir, Chander Pal and Sita Ram (appellant) were jointly tried for an offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC as also for the offence punishable under Section 392/397/34 IPC and for an offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act.2. Vide decision dated February 27, 1998, the three accused were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC. Pal and Sita Ram were found guilty Chander of the offence punishable under Section 392/34 IPC as also for the offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act. Dhanvir was found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 392/397/34 IPC as a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-22-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:22. d August, 2014 + CS(OS) 170/2012 AKTIEBOLAGET VOLVO & ORS. Through: Ms. Tanvi Misra, Advocate .... Plaintiff versus BABU LAL SHARMA & ANR Through: None ..... Defendant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. Present suit has been filed by the plaintiffs for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, dilution of trademark, unfair competition, damages and delivery up.2. Summons were issued in the suit on 23.01.2012. Defendants entered appearance on 15.03.2012 and sought time to file written statement and reply to the interim application but no written statement was filed. None appeared for the defendants on 30.05.2012 and on 01.06.2012, consequently defendants were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 01.06.2012 and the interim order dated 23.01.2012 was made absolute.3. Plaintiffs have filed affidavit by way of evidence of the constituted attorney of plaintiffs, Col. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-18-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on: November 18, 2014 W.P.(C) 7779/2013& CM No.16548/2013 (for stay) M/S NATIONAL HEART INSTITUTE & ANR. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.Satyakam, Advocate with Mr. S.K. Shailly, General Manager ( F & L) of the Petitioners. Versus GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI (LOBOUR) AND ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Dheeraj Kaushik for Ms. Raavi Birbal, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.W.P.(C) No.7779/2013 1. The present petition is directed against the order dated 06.09.2013, whereby the Learned Tribunal dismissed the application filed by the petitioners under Section 151 CPC.2. Brief facts of the case are that vide order dated 01.04.2010 services of the respondent No.2/workman was terminated after holding a departmental enquiry. Vide order dated 11.11.2009, Under Secretary (Labour) referred the following question to the Labour Court for adjudica...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-27-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. No.344 of 2014 Reserved on: November 18, 2014 Delivered on: November 27, 2014 FIROZ KHAN Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Arundhati Katju and Mr. Himanshu Suman, Advocates versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP SI Govind Singh, PS: Uttam Nagar, Delhi WITH CRL.A. No.798 of 2014 NEWAL KUMAR PANDEY ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Vikas Padora, Advocate versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP SI Govind Singh, PS: Uttam Nagar, Delhi AND CRL.A. No.637 of 2014 SHAHZAD HUSSAIN Through: ..... Appellant Mr. D.B. Yadav, Advocate versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP SI Govind Singh, PS: Uttam Nagar, Delhi CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2711.2014 1. These appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 7th November 2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in SC No.378/1/10 convicting the three Appellants for th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-31-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:31. t October, 2014 % + I.A. No.12386/2011 in CS(OS) 1911/2011 BRIJ MOHAN BHATIA Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Rajiv Singh Pilania, Adv. with Mr.Lalit Kumar, Adv. versus JAIN SALES CORPORATION & ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr.Sumant De, Adv. with Mr.A.K.Mehta, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The present suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of registered trademarks, copyrights, delivery up, rendition of accounts of profits, damages etc. has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendants in respect of trademark Flexilam Nomex. Alongwith the suit, plaintiff also filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC being I.A. 12386/2011.2. Summons were issued in the suit and notices in the application to the defendants on 8th August, 2011. After hearing, detailed exparte order was passed against the defendants restraining them from using the name Fle...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 03, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: November10, 2014 % + CRL.A. 804/2014 SUNIL @ BABU Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.P.S.Pradhan, Advocate. versus STATE Represented by: + ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Yashpal Singh, Crime Branch and SI Gorav. Mr.Rajeev Nanda, Advocate for deceaseds father. CRL.A. 854/2014 VINOD @ VINODI Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms.Nandita Rao, Advocate. versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Yashpal Singh, Crime Branch and SI Gorav. Mr.Rajeev Nanda, Advocate for deceaseds father. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Sunil @ Babu and Vinod @ Vinodi have been convicted for the offence of murder of Jitender vide impugned judgment dated March 26, 2014 and directed to undergo imprisonment for life.2. Learned counsels for the appellants assa...
Tag this Judgment!