Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-19-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:19. h January, 2015 + CS (OS) No.678/ 2013 SYMED LABS LTD. Through: ..... Plaintiff Ms. Shwetasree Majumdar, Advocate with Mr. Prithvi Singh, Advocate and Mr. Rajeshwar, Advocate versus GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. AND ANR. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Rajeev K. Virmani, Senior Advocate with Ms. Rajeshwari H., Advocate, Mr. S. Hariharan, Advocate, Mr. Tahir Abdul Tabbur, Advocate, Ms. Anindita Mitra, Advocate and Ms. Aparna, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL I.A. No.5908/ 2013 (Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC) and I.A. No.5417/ 2013 (Order VII Rules 10 and 11 CPC) in CS (OS) No.678/ 2013 1. By virtue of this application, the Plaintiff seeks an ad interim injunction restraining the Defendants, their agents, etc. from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising or directly or indirectly dealing in the product Linezolid manufactured in a manner so as to result in infringement of the Plaintiffs registered pate...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Jan-16-2015
1 INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cont.Case(Civil)No.222of2010, I.A.No.5496of2014 In Cont.Case(Civil)No.456of2012, Cont.Case(Civil)No.1167of2012, Cont.Case(Civil)No.1179of2012 Cont.Case(Civil)No.81of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.87of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.101of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.118of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.158of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.168of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.173of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.194of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.195of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.204of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.208of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.221of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.248of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.258of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.260of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.266of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.269of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.278of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.281of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.288of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.289of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.314of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.338of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.353of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.355of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.454of2013, Cont.Case(Civil)No.482of2013, Cont.Case(C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-16-2015
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.99 OF2015(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL) NO.1491 of 2012) MANOHAR SINGH ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 23rd November, 2011 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur in Criminal Revision No.6 of 2009 by the complainant against the acquittal of the respondents of offences other than Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code ("IPC") and grant of probation to them setting aside the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the trial Court. As many as 13 accused were tried on the allegations that they assaulted and caused injuries to PW-5- Manohar Singh, appellant, Devi Singh PW-4, Maan Singh PW-11 and Karan Singh PW-1 on 29th October, 1980 at around 2 P.M. with a view to disturb the possession of the complainant party on the agricultural land in question.3. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-15-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI O.M.P. 322/2013 ENFIELD INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Kavita Jha and Ms. Shraddha, Advocates. versus NTPC VIDYUT VYAPAR LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Bharat Sangal with Ms. Anasuya Choudhury and Ms. Saggar Malhotra, Advocates for Respondent No.1. Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate for Respondent No.4. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER1501.2015 1. This petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) by Enfield Infrastructure Limited (EIL) seeks interim relief in respect of a bank guarantee for Rs.5,07,54,000 and two bank guarantees for Rs.10,15,08,000 each against Respondent No.1 NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Ltd. (NVVL) furnished by EIL to NVVL.2. EIL and NVVL entered into a power purchase agreement (PPA) on 25th January 2012. Pursuant thereto the aforementioned three bank guarantees were furnished by EIL to NVVL. In terms of the PPA, EIL was required to commission the Solar PV Project of 10MW capac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-14-2015
$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :14. 01.2015 + CUS.A.A.1/2015, C.M. NOS.687-688/2015 SHRI M.P. GOENKA .Appellant Through: Sh. Prakash Gautam, Advocate. versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE) Respondent Through: Sh. Kamal Nijhawan, Sr. Standing Counsel with Sh. Sumit Gaur, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. This is an appeal under Section 130 of Customs Act, 1962 against the final order dated 15.09.2014, rejecting Customs Appeal No.C/147 & 195/2009-CU(DB) passed by the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, whereby the penalty imposed by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), was affirmed.2. The appellant is an authorized representative of a sole proprietary concern, viz. Adiya Trading Company. He conducts the business of that firm, i.e. cotton and polyester fabric procurement, CUS.A.A.1/2015 Page 1 from traders in Mumbai as w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Jan-12-2015
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 162 of 2014 ------- 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, P.O and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi.2. The Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, H.E.C., P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi 3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, P.O and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. ... .. ... ... ... Appellants Versus Jai Prakash Singh son of Dr. S.R. Rai, resident of Qr. No. E-21, Sector-III, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. ... .. ... ... . Respondent ------ CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. PATEL HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMATH PATNAIK ------ For the Appellants : Mr. Sumir Prasad, Standing Counsel I. For the Respondent : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advoate. ------ 09/Dated:12. h January, 2015 Per Pramath Patnaik, J.:1. In the instant Letters Patent Appeal, the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-12-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE12H DAYOF JANUARY201522ND POUSHA, 1936 CRP.No. 142 of 2004 ( ) ------------------------ OA. NO.150/1973 OF LAND TRIBUNAL (LR. NO.I), KASARAGOD. AA. NO.32/1996 OF APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LAND REFORMS), KANNUR. ...... REVISION PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS2TO18PETITIONERS2TO18 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MARIYAMMA, WIFE OF LATE ABDULLA HAJI.2. ABDULKHADER.3. HAMEED.4. ABDULRAHIMAN.5. SAFFIYA.6. MAMMUNHI.7. IBRAHIM.8. ABOOBACKER.9. SULAIMAN.10. BEEFATHUMMA.11. IQUBAL.12. JABBAR.13. ABDULLA. (MINOR).14. HANISA. (MINOR).15. MINIRIA (MINOR).16. MUNEER. (MINOR).17. MUSILA. NOS.2 TO9ARE CHILDREN OF ABDULLA HAJI AND NO.1 MARIYAMMA. NOS.10 TO17ARE WIDOW AND CHILDREN OF MOHAMMED, NOS.13 TO17ARE MINORS BY GUARDIAN MOTHER NO.10 BEEFATHUMMA. ALL ARE RESIDING AT THOOKIMOOLE IN MUTTATHODY VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT, P.O.A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-09-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:09. 01.2015 + W.P.(C) 4330/2012 MAHARASHTRA HYBRID SEED CO. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 4365/2012 SUNGRO SEEDS LTD versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 4366/2012 DCM SHRIRAM CONSOLIDATED LTD. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 6199/2012 M/S BAYER BIOSCIENCE PVT LTD versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 7853/2012 MONSANTO HOLDINGS PVT LTD AND ANR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents ..... Petitioner ..... Respondent ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners :Mr R. Parthasarthy and Mr Anil Dutt and Mr Sudarshan S. Shekhawat for petitioner in all matters. For the Respondents :Mr Saqib for R-1/UOI in W.P.(C) 4330/2012. Mr Anil Soni, CGSC with Ms Saakshi Agarwal for R-1/UOI in W.P.(C) 4365/2012 & W.P.(C) 4366/2012. Mr Amit Mahajan CGSC with Mr Nitya Sharma for R-1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-09-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:09. 01.2015 + W.P.(C) 4330/2012 MAHARASHTRA HYBRID SEED CO. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 4365/2012 SUNGRO SEEDS LTD versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 4366/2012 DCM SHRIRAM CONSOLIDATED LTD. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 6199/2012 M/S BAYER BIOSCIENCE PVT LTD versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 7853/2012 MONSANTO HOLDINGS PVT LTD AND ANR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents ..... Petitioner ..... Respondent ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners :Mr R. Parthasarthy and Mr Anil Dutt and Mr Sudarshan S. Shekhawat for petitioner in all matters. For the Respondents :Mr Saqib for R-1/UOI in W.P.(C) 4330/2012. Mr Anil Soni, CGSC with Ms Saakshi Agarwal for R-1/UOI in W.P.(C) 4365/2012 & W.P.(C) 4366/2012. Mr Amit Mahajan CGSC with Mr Nitya Sharma for R-1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-09-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:09. 01.2015 + W.P.(C) 4330/2012 MAHARASHTRA HYBRID SEED CO. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 4365/2012 SUNGRO SEEDS LTD versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 4366/2012 DCM SHRIRAM CONSOLIDATED LTD. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 6199/2012 M/S BAYER BIOSCIENCE PVT LTD versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR + W.P.(C) 7853/2012 MONSANTO HOLDINGS PVT LTD AND ANR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents ..... Petitioner ..... Respondent ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners :Mr R. Parthasarthy and Mr Anil Dutt and Mr Sudarshan S. Shekhawat for petitioner in all matters. For the Respondents :Mr Saqib for R-1/UOI in W.P.(C) 4330/2012. Mr Anil Soni, CGSC with Ms Saakshi Agarwal for R-1/UOI in W.P.(C) 4365/2012 & W.P.(C) 4366/2012. Mr Amit Mahajan CGSC with Mr Nitya Sharma for R-1...
Tag this Judgment!