Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-05-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: November 22, 2017 Pronounced on: January 05, 2018 + CRL.A.362/2016 VIPIN KUMAR SALUJA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Azhar Qayum, Advocate with Mr.Narender Kumar, Advocate. Versus STATE Through: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP ..... Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. This appeal is directed against a judgment dated 6th November, 2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi in S.C.No.88/2013 arising out of FIR No.17/2008 registered at Police Station (PS) Rohini convicting the Appellant under Sections 302, 364,392,201 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the order on sentence dated 16th November, 2015 whereby: (i) for the offence under Section 302 IPC, the Appellant was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.50,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 years; (ii) for the offence under Section 364 IPC, he was sentenced to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-05-2018
$~ *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C)No.10498/2015 and CM No.44852/2016 % Reserved on :30. h November, 2017 Date of decision :5. h January, 2018 KUSH KALRA Through: Dr. ........ Petitioner Charu Wali and Mr. Singh Khanna Dharmendra Pal, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Mr. Gautam Narayan, Amicus Curiae ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC for R-1/UOI with Ms. Sanya and Mr. Panjwani Kunal Dutt, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE The subordination of one sex to the other ought to be replaced by a principle of perfect equality, admitting no power or privilege on the one side, nor disability on the other. John Stuart Mill W.P.(C)No.10498/2015 Page 1 of 44 1. This writ petition, instituted in public interest by the petitioner, complains of institutional discrimination by the respondents against women and prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of a mandamus to place ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-29-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.460/2018 + % NAVAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGICAL LABORATORY & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Ms. Madhuri Dhingra and 29th May, 2018 Mr.Ajay Digpaul, Advocates. M/S TSL DEFENCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. & ANR. versus ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. No.22668/2018 (for exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. C.M. Appl. Nos.22667/2018 (for condonation of delay in filing) & 22669/2018 (for condonation of delay in re-filing) 2. For the reasons stated in the application, delays of 89 days in filing and 6 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. C.M.s stand disposed of. RFA No.460/2018 and C.M. Appl. No.22666/2018 (for stay) 3. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant No.2 in the RFA No.460/2018 Page 1 of 7 suit impugning the judgmen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-29-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. h May, 2018. CS(COMM) 125/2017 & IAs No.21699/2015 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC), 3151/2016 (u/O VIII R-1 CPC) & 13417/2017 (of D-2&4 u/O XXXIV R-4 CPC) & CCP(O) Nos.123/2015 & 25/2016 SANJAY KAPUR & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Suhasini Raina and Mr. Ashwin Kumar, Advs. Versus PLANTERS PRIDE & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Manish Biala, Mr. Devesh Ratan and Mr. Ashutosh Upadhyaya, Advs. with Mr. D-4 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW The two plaintiffs, namely Sanjay Kapur as proprietor of AAP KI1 PASAND and Naina Kapur as proprietor of AAP KI PASAND EXPORTS, carrying on business of marketing and export of tea, have instituted this suit to restrain the four defendants namely (i) Planters Pride; (ii) Holistic Healing; (iii) Amrita Chopra; and, (iv) Dhruv Baijnath, also in the business of market and export of tea, from advertising and selling their tea in packaging similar/slavish imitation of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-29-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 549/2018 & I.A. 7542/2004 DABUR INDIA LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr Manish K. Mishra with Ms Akansha Singh, Advocates VAIDYA NANDRAM GIGRAJ CHAMRIA ..... Defendant Date of Decision:29. h May, 2018 versus Through None % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement of copyright, design, passing off, damages/rendition of accounts and delivery up etc. against the defendant. The prayer clause in the present suit is reproduced hereinbelow:-"from manufacturing, selling, offering (i) A decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant, its partners or proprietor as the case may be, its servants, agents, assigns in business, its dealers, stockists etc. for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in churan or any other ayurvedic preparation bearing impugned packaging as are subject matter of the present suit or any other...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-28-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:28. h May, 2018 CS(COMM) 55/2018 & IAs No.1193/2018 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC) & 1194/2018 (u/O XXVI R-9 CPC) RAJESH KALRA ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sanjeev Singh and Mr. D.K. Yadav, Advs. Versus SAFEOPS. SURGICAL CARE & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Ankit Jain, Amicus Curie/Adv. with Mr. Divij Soni, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The plaintiff, as per the amended plaint dated 27th January, 2018, has instituted this suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of registered design and copyright inhering in its Pre-Cut Eye Drape and passing off and of ancillary reliefs of rendition of accounts, damages etc., pleading: (i) that the plaintiff is carrying on business of manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sale of medical and surgical, dental, veterinary apparatus and instruments and artificial limbs and eyes in the name and style of M/s Surgitech Innovation; (ii) that the plaintiff, in it...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-25-2018
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (COMM) No.890/2018 Reserved on:18. h May, 2018 Pronounced on:25. h May, 2018 CHRISTIAN LOUBOUTIN SAS Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Udita Patro, Advocate and Mr. Shamim Nooreyedan, Advocate. ..... Defendants versus ABUBAKER & ORS. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The plaintiff company Christian Louboutin SAS has filed this suit seeking reliefs of injunction against the infringement of its trademark, passing off, damages etc. Plaintiff has sought the reliefs as prayed for in the suit, vide para 54 (a) of the plaint, by pleading exclusive ownership of its registered trademarks RED SOLE under the registration nos.1922048, 2341890 and 2341891 granted by the Registrar of Trademarks. The registration granted, and with respect to CS(COMM) No.890/2018 Page 1 of 47 which reliefs are claimed in the suit, being RED SOLE is not a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-24-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $-21,22 & 23 * % + W.P.(C) 9230/2016, CM APPL. 37322/2016 (Stay), CM APPL. 17694/2017, CM APPL. 37599/2017 (for directions), CM APPL. 1628/2018 (for directions) Decided on:24. 05.2018 UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mrs. Maninder Kaur Acharya, ASG along with Mr. Rajesth Katyal, Adv. versus ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr Rakesh Kumar Khanna, Sr. Adv with Mr S.K. Gupta and Mr Ashutosh Dubey and Ms Shefali Jain and Ms Drishti Rathore, Advs. + W.P.(C) 9231/2016, CM APPL. 37325/2016 (Stay), CM APPL. 17696/2017 UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mrs. Maninder Kaur Acharya, ASG along with Mr. Rajesth Katyal, Adv. versus SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 9230/2016 & connected matters Page 1 Through: Mr Rakesh Kumar Khanna, Sr. Adv with Mr S.K. Gupta and Mr Ashutosh Dubey and Ms Shefali Jain and Ms Drishti Rathore, Advs. + W.P.(C) 9274/2016, CM APPL. 37434/2016 (stay), CM APP...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-24-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $-21,22 & 23 * % + W.P.(C) 9230/2016, CM APPL. 37322/2016 (Stay), CM APPL. 17694/2017, CM APPL. 37599/2017 (for directions), CM APPL. 1628/2018 (for directions) Decided on:24. 05.2018 UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mrs. Maninder Kaur Acharya, ASG along with Mr. Rajesth Katyal, Adv. versus ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr Rakesh Kumar Khanna, Sr. Adv with Mr S.K. Gupta and Mr Ashutosh Dubey and Ms Shefali Jain and Ms Drishti Rathore, Advs. + W.P.(C) 9231/2016, CM APPL. 37325/2016 (Stay), CM APPL. 17696/2017 UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mrs. Maninder Kaur Acharya, ASG along with Mr. Rajesth Katyal, Adv. versus SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 9230/2016 & connected matters Page 1 Through: Mr Rakesh Kumar Khanna, Sr. Adv with Mr S.K. Gupta and Mr Ashutosh Dubey and Ms Shefali Jain and Ms Drishti Rathore, Advs. + W.P.(C) 9274/2016, CM APPL. 37434/2016 (stay), CM APP...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-24-2018
$~ *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:16. h December, 2017 Pronounced on:24. h May, 2018 + CRL.A. 773/2015 SANJAY KUMAR VALMIKI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sumeet Verma and Mr. Aman Chaudhary, Advocates STATE versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR % JUDGMENT C. HARI SHANKAR, J.1. There are no frills in this story. It is an account of human depravity carried to such an unmentionable extreme, that there remains no room for embellishment or embroidery. It has to be told, and told with brutal directness.2. PW-21 Sunita, who worked as a maid in the houses of the residents of KU-Block, Pitampura, proceeded to work at 3 p.m. on 11th July, 2011, leaving her 8 year old daughter U- whom the tragic travails of time and the cold constraints of the law compel us to consign to anonymity playing with her siblings in the park. After a CRL.A.773/2015 Page 1 of 89 while, U felt thirs...
Tag this Judgment!