Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-29-2019
$~ 23 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"29th August, 2019 RSA392019 & CM Nos. 22009/2019 & 8525/2019 PREM CHAND ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Y.S. Panwar, Adv. versus RAMBHOLI DEVI @ RAM BHOOLI DEVI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dwapayan Gupta with Ms. Shikha Goyal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) + 1. The respondent (decree holder) had instituted Civil Suit (7804/2016) against the appellant (judgment debtor) on 05.09.2013 praying for a decree for recovery of possession, arrears of rent and mesne profits (damages) in respect of premises described as a shop on the ground floor of property bearing No.592/22-B, Nakul Gali, Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi- 110032 (herein after referred to as suit shop).2. The decree holder claimed and the judgment debtor admitted that she was landlady in respect of the suit shop, he being a tenant therein, the tenancy having been created by a rent deed dated 01.07.2003 which was proved at the trial as Ex. P7. The ca...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-25-2019
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. 09.2019 + CRL.M.C. 4261/2019 and CRL.M.A. 34533/2019 M/S. DAYA ENGINEERING WORKS (SLEEPER) LTD. & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Akash Chatterjee, Adv. versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. Through: Mr. Mridul Jain, Spl. PP, CBI ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.RCBD1/2016/E/0012, registered at Police Station CBI, BS & FC for the offences punishable under sections 120-B/420/467/468/471 IPC along with the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.2. The gist of the allegation in the FIR registered is that M/S Daya Sugar a unit of M/s Daya Engineering Works (sleeper) Ltd., through its Directors, in conspiracy with unknown accused bank officials and private persons cheated the consortium of banks to the tune of Rs.5261.63 Lacs. CRL.M.C.4261/2019 Pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-30-2019
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: Pronounced on:30. 09.2019 27.09.2019 + BAIL APPLN. 2270/2019 & Crl.M.A. 36692/2019 P. CHIDAMBARAM ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Kapil Sibal, Mr.Abhishek Manu Singhavi, Mr.Salman Khurshid, Mr.Vivek Tankha, Mr.A.S. Chandiok, Mr.N. Hari Haran, Mr.Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advs. with Mr.Arshdeep Singh Khurana, Mr.Kunal Vajani, Mr.Varun K. Chopra, Mr.Amit Bhandari, Mr.Adit Pujari, Mr.Hitesh Rai, Mr.Akshat Gupta, Mr.Ayush Agarwal, Mr.Karan Gogna, Mr.Aamir Khan, Mr.Aman Singh Brar, Mr.Akshay Sahni, Ms.Anshu Kapoor, Mr.Bilal Khan & Mr.R.V. Prabhat, Advs. versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Through Mr.Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, ..... Respondent Mr.Amit Mahajan & Mr.Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr.RajatNair & Mr.Kanu Agrawal, Spl. Counsels, for CBI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT Vide the present bail petition, the... Petitioner/accused herein Sh. P. BAIL APPLN. 2270/2019 Page 1 of 47 Chidambaram seeks bail i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-10-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 743/2019 SACHIN alias CHAJJA ..... Appellant Through Mr. Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocate with Mr.Badar Mahmood, Mr.Atul Kumar Sharma and Mr.Aditya Raj, Advocates. versus $~ * + THE STATE ..... Respondent Through Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State. Reserved on :19. h September, 2019 Date of Decision:10. h October, 2019 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J:1. Present appeal has been filed by the appellant-convict challenging the judgment dated 05th March, 2019 and the order dated 08th March, 2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-03 (FTC), North-West, Rohini Courts, Delhi in Sessions Case No.53529/2016 arising out of FIR No.617/2016 under Section 302 IPC and Sections Arms Act registered with Police Station Mangolpuri, whereby the appellant-convict had been convicted under Section 302 IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 30,000/- ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-14-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:14. h October, 2019 CS(COMM) 89/2019, IAs No.2499/2019 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) & 9149/2019 (u/OVII R-11 CPC) SATISH KUMAR ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Lokesh Kumar Mishra, Adv. Versus KHUSHBOO SINGH & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Adv. with Mr. P.S. Rana & Ms. Disha Passi, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The plaintiff Satish Kumar has instituted this suit against (a) Khushboo Singh; (b) Abhishek Chauhan; and (c) Aarya Fashion through its proprietor Khushboo Singh, for (i) permanent injunction in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants, thereby restraining the defendants and their agents, servants, relatives, associates, attorney, etc. from logging in, accessing and using the official email ids of the plaintiff including [email protected] [email protected] and further disseminating, reproducing, uploading, publishing, circulating, broadcasting, distributing...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-23-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 1106/2018 % Judgment reserved on: September 27th, 2019 Judgment pronounced on:23. d October, 2019 AKASH ....Appellant Through: Mr. Chetan Lokur with Mr. Nitish Chaudhary, Advocates Versus State with SI Rajeshwar, PS STATE Palam Village ....Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the CORAM: SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL1 The present Appeal is instituted on behalf of the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) against the impugned judgment dated 13.07.2018 and order on sentence dated 18.07.2018 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dwarka Courts, Delhi, in Session Case No.440982/2016 in FIR No.157/2013, registered at Police Station Palam Village under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (hereinafter referred to as IPC) whereby the appellant was convicted for the offenc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-24-2019
$~8 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Delivered on :24. h October, 2019 + RFA3132018 MASYC PROJECTS PVT LTD ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Tarun Sharma, Ms.Akanksha Kapoor and Mr.Pradeep Singh, Advocates. versus NILACHAL IRON AND POWER LTD ..... Respondent and Through : Mr.Gaurav Kejriwal Mr.Gurpreet Hora, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant against the judgment and decree dated 19.12.2017 passed by the learned Additional District Judge- 06/West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred as the learned Trial Court) in CS No.11280/2016 whereby the suit filed by appellant for recovery of Rs.20,37,506/- was dismissed, primarily, on grounds of territorial jurisdiction.2. The brief facts which led to the filing of the suit, as are noted in impugned judgment are as under:-"1. xxxxxxxxx the plaintiff company is engaged in manufacture of material handling equipments like belt, conveyors, conveying a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-31-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 1117/2018 SANDEEP STATE Through Mr.Ajay Verma, Advocate. ..... Appellant versus Through Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State ..... Respondent with Inspector Radhey Shyam, PS Narela ATO. Reserved on :15. h October, 2019 Date of Decision:31. t October, 2019 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J:1. Present appeal has been filed by the appellant-convict challenging the judgment dated 21st August, 2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Special Fast Track Court, Rohini, Delhi in Sessions Case No.115/2013 arising out of FIR No.337/2009 registered with Police Station Narela convicting him under Sections 201, 302, 342 and 120B IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 25,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 120B, imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 120B IPC, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-01-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:1. t November, 2019. CS(COMM) 699/2018, IA No.3814/2017(u/O.XXXIX R-2A CPC) & IA No.5770/2019(u/O.III R-4(2) CPC) MEHRA COSMETICS ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Mohan Vidhani with Mr. Rahul Vidhani, Mr. Ashish Singh, Ms. Elisha Kumar & Mr. Saurabh Kumar, Advs. Versus RAM KUMAR GULATI & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Saurav Rajan Chauhan with Mr. Akshay Srivastava & Ms. Pratibha, Advs. along with D-1&2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW The plaintiff instituted the suit against the four defendants, namely (a) 1. Ram Kumar Gulati; (b) Raj Kumar Gulati; (c) D.K.Cosmetics; and, (d) G.M. Plastics, for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from (a) infringing the trade mark BLUE CLIFF of the plaintiff by adopting the mark BLUE CHEF with respect to the same goods; (b) passing off their goods as that of the plaintiff under the mark BLUE CHIEF, by use of the mark BLUE CHEF; (c) infringement of registered desi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-05-2019
+ W.P.(C) 13901/2018 ANJU BALA Reserved on:06. 09.2019 Pronounced on:05. 11.2019 ........ Petitioner $~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Through Mr.A.K. Bhardwaj, Adv. with Ms.Jagriti Singh, Adv. versus GAIL (INDIA) LIMITED AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr.V.K. Garg, Sr. Adv. with Ms.Noopur Dubey & Mr.Amit Kumar, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT1 Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby to quash and set aside the impugned memorandum No.CO/HR/Disc./D- 142/2016 dated 02.08.2016, inquiry report dated 28.03.2017, orders dated 31.05.2017, 23.08.2017, 11.04.2018 and 06.12.2018.2. Further seeks direction thereby directing the respondents to re-instate the petitioner back in service with all consequential benefits. W.P.(C) 13901/2018 Page 1 of 44 3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner joined the respondent company as Management Trainee (E-1) w.e.f. 01.06.2002. She got promotions as Senior Officer in E-2 Grade, Dy...
Tag this Judgment!