Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-08-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.46164617 OF2018MONSANTO TECHNOLOGY LLC THRU THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MS. NATALIA VORUZ & OTHERS ....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LTD. THRU THE DIRECTOR & OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S) with CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 188 OF2019(arising out of SLP(C) No.19411 of 2018 .APPELLANT(S) FEDERATION OF SEED INDUSTRY OF INDIA (FSII) VERSUS NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LTD. AND OTHERS.RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 189190 OF2019(arising out of SLP(C) Nos.1647916480 of 2018 NUZIVEEDU SEEDS LTD. AND ORS. ..APPELLANT(S) VERSUS MONSANTO TECHNOLOGY LLC AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 191192 OF2019(arising out of SLP(C) Nos.1940919410 of 2018 ALL INDIA KISAN SABHA ..APPELLANT(S) VERSUS MONSANTO TECHNOLOGY LLC AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S) 1 JUDGMENT NAVIN SINHA, J.Leave granted.2. The appellants/plaintiffs in Civil Appeal Nos.46164617 of 2018 instituted Civil Suit (Comm) No.132 of 2016 seeking permanent injunction ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-08-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:10. h August, 2017 Decided on:8. h January, 2019 CS(OS) 205/2009 RODERICK JOHN ANDREW MACKENZIE..... Plaintiff Represented by: Mr.Kirti S. Javali and Ms.Nikita C. Jain, Advocates. Versus HIMALAYAN HELI SERVICES PVT. LTD. ..... Defendant Represented by: Mr. Vivek Malik and Mr.Mukul Thakur, Advocates. + Crl. M.A. No.5011/2009 in CS(OS) 210/2009 HIMACHAL HELICOPTER SKIING PTY LTD...... Plaintiff Represented by: Mr. Kirti S. Javali, Advocate. versus HIMALAYAN HELI SERVICES PVT. LTD...... Defendant Represented by: Mr.Vivek Malik and Mr.Mukul Thakur, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 Roderick John Andrew Mackenzie, the plaintiff in CS(OS) No.205/2009 filed the suit inter alia seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants their employees, servants, agents etc. from using or otherwise copying, selling, offering for sale, counterfeit/unlicensed versions of the plaintiffs copyright in his artistic work HIMLAYAN ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-08-2019
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:10. h August, 2017 Decided on:8. h January, 2019 CS(OS) 205/2009 RODERICK JOHN ANDREW MACKENZIE..... Plaintiff Represented by: Mr.Kirti S. Javali and Ms.Nikita C. Jain, Advocates. Versus HIMALAYAN HELI SERVICES PVT. LTD. ..... Defendant Represented by: Mr. Vivek Malik and Mr.Mukul Thakur, Advocates. + Crl. M.A. No.5011/2009 in CS(OS) 210/2009 HIMACHAL HELICOPTER SKIING PTY LTD...... Plaintiff Represented by: Mr. Kirti S. Javali, Advocate. versus HIMALAYAN HELI SERVICES PVT. LTD...... Defendant Represented by: Mr.Vivek Malik and Mr.Mukul Thakur, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 Roderick John Andrew Mackenzie, the plaintiff in CS(OS) No.205/2009 filed the suit inter alia seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants their employees, servants, agents etc. from using or otherwise copying, selling, offering for sale, counterfeit/unlicensed versions of the plaintiffs copyright in his artistic work HIMLAYAN ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-07-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:18. h December, 2018 Pronounced on:7. h January, 2019 + W.P.(C) 8791/2018 & CM APPLs. 52194-95/2018 MASTER SINGHAM (THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN) ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Tanmaya Mehta, Adv. with Mr. Mohit Mudgal and Ms.Akansha Sharma, Advs. versus DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION AND ANR ...... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. P.S. Sudheer, Adv. with Mrs. A. Mathew and Mr. Bharat Sood, Adv. for R-2 Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC for GNCTD with Ms. Mahamaya Chatterjee and Ms. Shivani Vij, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT % 1. Master Singham is an 8-year old boy. He was granted admission, in the Sanskriti School (hereinafter referred to as the School) in 2013, under the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category. Three years later, his admission was ignominiously cancelled, by the Directorate of Education (DoE), vide under Section 24(3) of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the DSE Act) read with c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-07-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2530 OF2012Birla Institute of Technology .Appellant(s) VERSUS The State of Jharkhand & Ors. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 02.04.2008 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in LPA No.53 of 2007 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the LPA filed by the appellant herein and confirmed the order dated 12.01.2007 passed by the Single Judge of the High Court in W.P. No.2572 of 2005. 1 2. The controversy involved in this appeal is a short one as would be clear from the facts stated infra.3. The appellant is a premier technical educational institute of repute in the country. It is known as Birla Institute of Technology (BIT).4. Respondent No.4 joined the appellantInstitute as Assistant Professor on 16.09.1971 and superannuated on 30.11.2001 after attaining the age of superannuation.5. Respondent No....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-04-2019
1 NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1931 OF2009Champa Lal Dhakar .. Appellant Versus Naval Singh Rajput & Ors. .. Respondents JUDGMENT M. R. Shah, J.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh dated 1.2.2008 in Criminal Revision No.830 of 2007, by which the High Court has partly allowed the said Revision Application preferred by the respondents herein original Accused and has set aside the order passed by the learned trial Court framing the charge under Section 307 of the IPC, the original Complainant has preferred the present appeal. 2 2. That the Appellant herein original Complainant lodged a FIR against the original Accused for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 451, 325/149, 307/149, 294/149 and 506/149 of the IPC. That the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sironj, District Vidisha in S.T. No.197 of 2005 framed the charge against the original ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-01-2019
$~5 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P. (C) 8497/2016 SATYENDRA KUMAR JHA ........ Petitioner Through:... Petitioner in person. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Mukesh Kumar, Advocate with Mr.Naveen Kumar, DC/CISF. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA ORDER0102.2019 % Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. Satyendra Kumar Jha, a Deputy Commandant in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) has filed this petition for a mandamus to the... RESPONDENTS to grant him the risk/hard area allowance from 18th April 2016 when he was posted at the CISF Unit, National Aluminium Company Limited (NALCO), Damanjodi, District Koraput, Odisha.2. The... Petitioner joined the CISF as Assistant Commandant on 16th April 2009. At the conclusion of his basic training he was conferred with awards for All round best Probationer, Best in outdoor and Best in firing.3. The... Petitioner was posted to the CISF Unit, Neyveli Lignite Corporation W.P.(C) 8497/2016 Page ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-31-2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of decision:31. t January, 2019 W.P.(C) 9883/2018, CM No.38508/2018 CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Through: Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. with ........ Petitioner Mr. Karan Malhotra, Mr. Vikram Bajaj, Mr. Rahul Raj, Mr. Chandra Thampi and Mr. Kapil Seth, Advs. ........ RESPONDENTS versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Through: Ms. Madhavi Divan, ASG with Mr. Akshay Makhija, CGSC with Ms. Nidhi Khanna and Ms. Aditya Goyal, Advs. for UOI AND + W.P.(C) 9889/2018, CM No.38522/2018 KNIGHT FRANK (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED Through: Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. with ........ Petitioner Mr. Karan Malhotra, Mr. Vikram Bajaj, Mr. Rahul Raj, Mr. Chandra Thampi and Mr. Kapil Seth, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Through: Ms. Madhavi Divan, ASG with ........ RESPONDENTS Mr. Akshay Makhija, CGSC with Ms. Nidhi Khanna and Ms. Aditya Goyal, Advs. for UOI AND + W.P.(C) 9890/2018, CM No.38524/2018 CBRE SOUTH ASIA PRIVATE LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-25-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL/APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.99 OF2018Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ..Petitioners Union of India & Ors. VERSUS WITH ..Respondents WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.100 OF2018WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.115 OF2018WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.459 OF2018WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.598 OF2018WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.775 OF2018WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.822 OF2018WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.849 OF2018WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.1221 OF2018SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.28623 OF2018WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.37 OF20191 JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.1. The present petitions assail the constitutional validity of various provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 [Insolvency Code or Code].. Since we are deciding only questions relating to the constitutional validity of the Code, we are not going into the individual facts of any case.2. Shri Mukul Rohatgi, learned Senior Advocate, appearing in Writ Petition (Civil) No.99 of 2018, has first...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-24-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * Reserved on:08. 05.2018 Pronounced on:24. 01.2019 FAO(OS) (COMM) 78/2018 & CM APPL. 17358-61/2018 M/S CROCS INC USA versus M/S BATA INDIA LTD & ORS ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS FAO(OS) (COMM) 79/2018 & CM APPL. 17362-65/2018 M/S CROCS INC USA versus M/S LIBERTY SHOES LTD & ANR ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS FAO(OS) (COMM) 80/2018 & CM APPL. 17366-69/2018 M/S CROCS INC USA versus M/S AQUALITE INDIA LTD & ORS ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS FAO(OS) (COMM) 81/2018 & CM APPL. 17370-73/2018 M/S CROCS INC USA versus M/S ACTION SHOES PVT LTD & ORS FAO(OS)(COMM)No.78/2018 & connected matters ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS Page 1 of 44 + + + + + + + + + FAO(OS) (COMM) 82/2018 & CM APPL. 17374-77/2018 M/S CROCS INC USA versus M/S AQUALITE INDIA LTD & ANR. ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS FAO(OS) (COMM) 83/2018 & CM APPL. 17378-81/2018 M/S CROCS INC USA ..... Appellant versus BIOWORLD MERCHANDISING INDIA LTD. & ANR.... RESPOND...
Tag this Judgment!