Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-15-2018
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.2879-2880 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.19545-19546 of 2016) BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA APPELLANT VERSUS KOCHI CRICKET PVT. LTD. AND ETC. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.2881 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) No.20224 of 2016) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.2882 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) No.5021 of 2017) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 2883-2884 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.8372-8373 of 2017) 1 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 2885-2886 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.8374-8375 of 2017) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 2887-2889 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.8376-8378 of 2017) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 2890-2891 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.9599-9600 of 2017) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.2892 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) No.33690 of 2017) JUDGMENT R.F. NARIMAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The present batch of appeals raises an important question as to the construction of Section 26 of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Am...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-13-2018
..... plaintiff has become the sole proprietor of the following trademarks in india:-"cs (comm) 726/2017 page 4 of 8 in support of the aforesaid submissions the plaintiff has filed nepali trade mark applications, trade mark registrations in india 1369593/816260/167343. d) due to the high quality of the plaintiff's product, there is a large demand for the plaintiff .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-13-2018
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.7875-7879 OF2015BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA A.K. BALAJI AND ORS. APPELLANT VERSUS WITH ...RESPONDENTS (Association of Indian Lawyers versus M/s. London Court of CIVIL APPEAL NO.7170 OF2015International Arbitration (LCIA) and ors.) AND CIVIL APPEAL No.8028 OF2015(Global Indian Lawyers versus Bar Council of India & Ors.) JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J1 The issue involved in this batch of matters is whether foreign law firms/lawyers are permitted to practice in India. Reference needs to be made to two leading matters. Civil Appeal Nos.7875-79 of 2015 have been filed by the Bar Council of India against the Judgment of Madras High Court dated 21st February, 2012 in A.K. Balaji versus The Government of India1. Civil Appeal No.8028 of 2015 has 1 AIR2012Mad 124 1 been filed by Global Indian Lawyers against the judgment of Bombay High Court dated 16th December, 2009 in Lawyers Collective versus Bar Council of India2....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-13-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:13. h March, 2018 CS(OS) No.499/2009 & CC Nos. 81/2009 & 40/2010, IA Nos. 17283/2013 (u/O VII R-11 CPC), 2432/2015 (u/O VI R-17 CPC) SHYAMA PAHWA ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Shailendar Dahiya, Adv. Versus NARENDRA PRATAP BHALLA & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sajan Narain, Adv. for D-1&2. Mr. Sunil Goyal, Mr. Deepak, Adv. for D-3. Ms. Suruchi Suri, Adv. for D-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The plaintiff, aged 73 years at the time of institution of the suit, in the year 2009 instituted this suit against her three brothers impleaded as defendants no.1 to 3 viz. a) Narendra Pratap Bhalla, b) Bharat Bhushan Bhalla; and, c) Mahinder Pratap Bhalla and her sister Smt. Kamla Ohri (defendant no.4).2. It was the case in the plaint i) that the plaintiff had been suffering from chronic depression for the past years and had been under psychiatric treatment since 1961; ii) that the plaintiff was residing at Mumba...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-09-2018
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.215 OF2005Common Cause (A Regd. Society) Versus Union of India and Another ...Petitioner(s) Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, CJI [for himself and A.M. Khanwilkar, J.]. I N D E X Heading S. No.A. Prologue B. Contentions in the Writ Petition Page No.3 10 C. Stand in the counter affidavit and the 14 applications for intervention D. Background of the Writ Petition D.1 P. Rathinams case The question of unconstitutionality of Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code D.2 Gian Kaurs case The question of unconstitutionality of Section 306 of 18 19 22 2 the Indian Penal Code D.3 The approach in Aruna Shanbaug qua Passive Euthanasia vis--vis India D.4 The Reference E. Our analysis of Gian Kaur F. Our analysis of Aruna Shanbaug qua legislation 30 42 45 51 G. The Distinction between Active and Passive 52 Euthanasia H. Euthanasia : International Position H.1 U.K. Decisions: H.1.1 Airedale Case H.1.2 Late...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-08-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:16. h December, 2017 Judgment pronounced on:8. h March, 2018 + CRL.A. No.1395/2013 SHREE BHAGWAN ....... Petitioner STATE Through: Mr Pramod Kumar Dubey with Ms Namita Wali and Mr Savraish Kumar, Advs. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms Aashaa Tiwari, APP. Insp. Anil Kumar, P.S. Bawana. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE S.P.GARG HONBLE MR JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR % (JUDGMENT) C. HARI SHANKAR, J1 This is yet another case sad and sordid in equal measure of innocence plundered. Case of the Prosecution 2. The case pleaded by the prosecution, and accepted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (hereinafter referred to as ASJ), may be recited thus: Crl Appeal 1395/2013 Page 1 of 67 2.1 Innocent and unaware of the predator lurking for her around the corner, the prosecutrix who, in view of the proscription imposed by State of Punjab vs. Ramdev Singh AIR2004SC1290 must remain unnamed and would, therefore, be designated by the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-07-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: February 13, 2018 Judgment delivered on: March 07, 2018 + W.P.(C) 9947/2016 SATISH KUMAR Through: Mr. Shiv Charan Garg, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Manish Srivastava, Adv. for R1. Mr. Vikas Bhadana, Adv. for R3. Mr. Sandeep Jain, Adv. for Ms. Shabhnam, the neighbour. Mr. Rahul Bakshi, Adv. for PS- Karawal Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT V. KAMESWAR RAO, J1 The present petition has been filed with the following prayers:-"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that under the facts and circumstances stated above and in the interest of justice and equity, this Honble Court may graciously be pleased to :-"i) pass appropriate writ, direction or order to the respondents in the facts and circumstances of the case; ii) direct the respondents no.1 and 2 to pay a W.P.(C) No.9947/2016 Page 1 of 12 sum of Rs.10,00,000/- jointly and severally...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-07-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % M/s SAWHNEY BROS. CS(OS) No.1/1982 7th March, 2018 ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Rajan Sabharwal, Advocate. versus HONGKONG SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Dalip Mehra and Ms. Shikha Mehra, Advocates for D-1. Ms. Sunita Dutt, Advocate for D-13 (Insurance Company). CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a suit filed by the plaintiff M/s Sawhney Brothers, a partnership firm, seeking recovery of Rs.70 lacs. There are a total of fourteen defendants in the suit. I need not narrate all the causes of action against all the fourteen defendants, inasmuch as, the counsel for the plaintiff seeks now a decree only against the defendant nos. 2 to 8 i.e the partnership firm of defendant no.2/M/s Orient Enterprises with its partners being defendant nos. 3 to 5, and the partnership firm of CS(OS) No.1/1982 Page 1 of 24 defendant no.6 known as M/...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-06-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 139/2015 Decided on:6. h March, 2018 Reserved on:12. h February, 2018 ROHIT @ RAHUL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Prakash Gautam, Mr.Sachin Gautam, Advocates. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP + AND CRL.A. 1541/2014 & Crl.M.A.6882/2017 SUNIL Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Mr. Prasanna, Advocates. ..... Appellant versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA % Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: JUDGMENT1 These appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 22nd August, 2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge II (North- Crl.A. 139/2015 & 1541/2014 Page 1 of 34 West) (ASJ), Rohini Courts, Delhi in Sessions Case No.85/2013 arising out of FIR No.278/2011 registered at Police Station (PS) Adarsh Nagar convicting Rudramani @ Rukmani @ Guderia @ Rohit (Accused No.1 A-1') and both the Appellants Rohit Kumar @ Ra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-06-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 139/2015 Decided on:6. h March, 2018 Reserved on:12. h February, 2018 ROHIT @ RAHUL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Prakash Gautam, Mr.Sachin Gautam, Advocates. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP + AND CRL.A. 1541/2014 & Crl.M.A.6882/2017 SUNIL Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Mr. Prasanna, Advocates. ..... Appellant versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA % Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: JUDGMENT1 These appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 22nd August, 2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge II (North- Crl.A. 139/2015 & 1541/2014 Page 1 of 34 West) (ASJ), Rohini Courts, Delhi in Sessions Case No.85/2013 arising out of FIR No.278/2011 registered at Police Station (PS) Adarsh Nagar convicting Rudramani @ Rukmani @ Guderia @ Rohit (Accused No.1 A-1') and both the Appellants Rohit Kumar @ Ra...
Tag this Judgment!