Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-25-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CONT.CAS.(CRL) 10/2019 & CRL.M.A. 38135/2019 COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION Through ........ Petitioner versus $~6 & 7 * + AMAN LOHIA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Malavika Rajkotia, Ms. Rytim Vohra, Ms. Akriti Tyagi, Mr. Sanjeevi Seshadri and Ms. Niharika Kaul, Advocates with Ms. Kiran Lohia in person. Ms. Geeta Luthra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Altamish Siddiki and Mr. Rajat Bhalla, Advocates for respondent No.1- Aman Lohia. Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vaibhav Sharma and Ms. Ruchika Wadhawan, Advocates for Ajey Lohia. Ms. Joshini Tuli, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 in person. Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, Spl. PP for UOI/CBI. + W.P.(CRL) 2375/2019 & CRL.M.As. 34316/2019, 34467/2019, WITH375572019, 38136/2019 AND392302017 KIRAN LOHIA Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Malavika Rajkotia, Ms. Rytim ........ Petitioner CONT.CAS.(CRL) 10/2019 & W.P.(Crl.) 237...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-13-2019
$~J * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:30. 01.2019 Judgment Pronounced on:13. 03.2019 CS(COMM) 1108/2018 INTERCITY HOTEL GMBH ..... Plaintiff Through Mr.Peeyoosh Kalra, Mr.C.A.Brijesh, Mr.Dhruv Grover and Mr.Rohan Seth, Advs. Versus HOTEL INTERCITY DELHI & ORS Through Mr.Anil ..... Defendants Sapra, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Satish Kumar, Mr.Vishal Patel, Mr.Sarthak Katyal and Ms.Akanksha, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.IA No.12193/2018 1. This application is filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC seeking an interim injunction to restrain the defendants, their servants, partners etc. from using the mark HOTEL INTERCITY DELHI or any other mark identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs registered trademark INTERCITYHOTEL either as a trade mark/corporate name/domain name.2. The plaintiff has filed the accompanying suit for permanent injunction against infringement of trade mark, passing off, unfair competition, rendition of accoun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-26-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:26. h March, 2019 CS(COMM) 10/2019 & IA No.259/2019 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) SURYA FOOD AND AGRO LIMITED .... Plaintiff Through: Mr. N. Mahabir and Mr. P.C. Arya, Advs. OM TRADERS & ANR. Versus ...Defendants Through: Mr. Hemant Sharma, Adv. for D-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The plaintiff has instituted this suit against the two defendants namely (i) Om Traders; and, (ii) Raja Udyog Private Limited (RUPL), for permanent injunction restraining selling, offering for sale any goods, advertising or promoting any product under the packaging, get up, trade dress of the defendants product BUTTER KRUNCH or any packaging, get up, trade dress which is similar to that of plaintiffs product BUTTER DELITE and likely to cause passing off and for ancillary reliefs.2. The suit came up first before this Court on 10th January, 2019, when though not finding any case of passing off to have been made out but observing that the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-04-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:4. h February, 2019 Decided on:4. h April, 2019 CRL.A. 990/2018 SHAMSHAD @ MURAPPAN & ORS. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Avinash Nandan Sharma, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, APP for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 By the present appeal, Shamshad @ Murappan, Akram and Shahrukh @ Sharup Khan challenge the impugned judgment dated 5th July, 2018 convicting them for the offence punishable under Sections 304 Part-II and 34 IPC and the order on sentence dated 7th July, 2018 directing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period six months for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-II/34 IPC.2. Assailing the conviction, learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellants have been convicted on the statement of the sole eye- witn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-05-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: September 13, 2018 Judgment delivered on: April 05, 2019 + W.P.(C) 9864/2017, CM No.40141/2017 M/S STELLING TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. (RAILYATRI.IN) AND ANR. Through: Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv. with ........ Petitioners Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Mr. Jiten Mehra, Ms. Vandana Sehgal, Mr. Anand Daga, Ms. Gunjan Ahuja and Mr. Iqram Govind Singh, Advs. for R3. versus INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Nikhil Majithia, Adv. for IRCTC AND + W.P.(C) 8562/2017, CM No.35240/2017 MR. ANAND PUROHIT ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Jain, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mandeep Singh Vinaik, Mr. Yuvraj Sharma and Ms. Sneh Suman, Advs. Versus INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Nikhil Majithia, Adv. for IRCTC. Mr. Arjun Garg and Mr. Manish Yadav, Advs. for R2. Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Mr. Jiten Mehra, Ms. Van...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-05-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 353/2003 IN THE MATTER OF: Reserved on:13. 02.2019 Date of decision:05. 04.2019 JAGRAJ SINGH alias RAJAN BHAIYA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Mohit Mathur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vikram Panwar and Mr. Vikas Walia, Advocates. versus Through: Mr. Amit Gupta, APP for State. ..... Respondent STATE OF DELHI CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI HIMA KOHLI, J.1. A limited question that has come up for consideration in the present appeal, arising from Sessions Case No.185/2001, in FIR No.301/2000, PS Patel Nagar, is as to whether the conviction of the appellant vide impugned judgment dated 21.4.2003, under Section 302 IPC and the order on sentence dated 22.4.2003, sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years, is liable to be upheld or he deserves to be held guilty for the commi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-10-2019
$ * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL. L.P. 153/2019 Judgment reserved on:28. h March, 2019 Judgment pronounced on:10. h April, 2019 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ....Appellant Through: Mr.Tarang Srivastava, APP for State with SI Suresh Chand, PS Kirti Nagar Versus JEEVAN SINGH ....Respondent Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL1 By this petition under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter as Cr.P.C), the appellant/State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 30.10.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge - 01, Special Court, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi whereby the respondent was acquitted of the charge under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter as IPC) in FIR No.248/2012, Police Station Kirti Nagar. CRL.L.P. 153/2019 Page 1 of 24 2. Brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Learned Trial Court, are as under:-"i.Prosecution case unveils with DD No.37A dated 20.08.2012 being recorded regard...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-10-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:11. 12.2018 Pronounced on:10. 04.2019 + W.P.(C) 11467/2018, CM APPL. 44376-44378/2018 MAHINDRA ELECTRIC MOBILITY LIMITED AND ANR. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANR. versus ........ Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner ....... RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioners ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ....... RESPONDENTS versus versus TATA MOTORS LIMITED & ANR COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA versus MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LTD. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ANR. GENERAL MOTORS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS + W.P.(C) 6610/2014 + W.P.(C) 6634/2014, CM APPL. 20409/2014 + W.P.(C) 7087/2014, CM APPL. 16614/2014, CM APPL. 39827/2018 + W.P.(C) 7121/2014, CM APPL. 16680/2014, CM APPL. 31959/2018 + W.P.(C) 7186/2014, CM APPL. 16889/2014 + W.P.(C) 7306/2014, CM APPL. 17096/2014 + W.P.(C) 7321/2014, CM APPL. 17118/2014 SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD UNION OF INDIA & ORS. MERCEDES BENZ INDIA PVT LT...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-10-2019
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: April 10, 2019 CRL.M.C. 1924/2019 PANKAJ UPPAL & ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Naval Jha, Advocate Versus THE STATE & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional Public Prosecutor with ASI Gian Chand. Mr. Lalit Yadav and Mr. Anil Thakur, Advocates with respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) CRL.M.A.7629/2019 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 1924/2019 Quashing of FIR No.76/2015, under Sections 498-A/4of IPC, registered at police station Nanakpura, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 20th July, 2018 (Annexure P-3). 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, by ASI Gian Chand on the basis of identity proof produced by her. CRL.M.C. 1924/2019 Page 1 of 3 R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-16-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:26. h March, 2019 Pronounced on:16. h April, 2019 + RC.REV. 309/2018, CM Appl. No.27327/2018 RAMESH CHAND ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Rajat Aneja, Ms.Chandrika Gupta, Advocates. versus SHYAMA ARORA Through Mr.Gaurav Advocate. ..... Respondent Singh, Kumar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This petition challenges the impugned order dated 07.04.2018 whereby the eviction petition filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed after evidence. Before coming to the issues raised it would be appropriate to state few facts.2. The petitioner herein filed an eviction petition in respect of a shop at No.97, Block-D, Gali No.6, Shashi Garden, Patparganj, Delhi. The said premises is required by the petitioner for his daughter in law to start a garment business.3. Admittedly the petitioner has two sons and three daughters; all are since married. The petitioner is a senior citizen of 65 years of age and has a meag...
Tag this Judgment!