Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-19-2019
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:19. h July, 2019 + CS(COMM) 157/2017 & I.A. 10119/2014 THERMAX LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. N.K. Bhardwaj & Mr. Bikash Ghorai, Advocates (M-9810147174) versus THERMAX ENGINEERS PVT LTD Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH ..... Defendant Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) 1. The Plaintiff Thermax Limited has filed the present suit seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of trade mark and trade name, passing off, etc. in respect of its trade name THERMAX. The case of the Plaintiff is that it had coined and adopted the mark THERMAX in 1974 and the same is being used as a trademark, house mark and is also a distinctive and prominent mark of its corporate name. The changes in the constitution of the company Thermax Ltd, from Thermax India Pvt. Ltd leading up to it becoming a listed company on 9th January, 1995, has been explained in paragraph 4 of the plaint.2. The mark THERMAX is also a registered t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-24-2019
$~10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * % + MAC.APP. 580/2018 & CM APPL. 54041/2018 Decided on:24. 07.2019 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Advocate. versus KHUSHBOO & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Roshan Lal, Advocate for R-2 and R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(Oral) 1. At joint-request, the case is taken up for final arguments.2. This appeal impugns the award of compensation dated 17.03.2018 in the claim petition bearing MACT No.449362 of 2016 on account of the unfortunate demise of the kin of the claimants in a road accident.3. It is the appellants case that the offending motor vehicle was not identified, therefore, the appellant would not be liable to indemnify the claimants and to pay the awarded amount. It was the claimants case that at about 8:40 pm on 14.02.2010, Raja, the deceased, tried to cross the road near Metro Station, Adarsh Nagar, when the offending vehicle i.e. a Maruti MAC.APP....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-26-2019
$~ * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 500/2019 ROHIT STATE Through Mr. R. M. Tufail, Advocate with ..... Appellant Mr. Farooq Chaudhary, Mr. Equebal Nasir and Mr. Naahid Nasir, Advocates. versus Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State ..... Respondent with Insp. Rajeev Ranjan, SI Jasmes Singh, PS Jahangir Puri. Mr. Kuber Giri with Mr. Sarvpreet Singh Chawla, Advocates for Victim-Complainant. WITH CRL.A. 504/2019 SHIV KUMAR @ SHIBU ..... Appellant Through Mr. R. M. Tufail, Advocate with Mr. Farooq Chaudhary, Mr. Equebal Nasir and Mr. Naahid Nasir, Advocates. STATE versus Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State ..... Respondent with Insp. Rajeev Ranjan, SI Jasmes Singh, PS Jahangir Puri. Mr. Kuber Giri with Mr. Sarvpreet Singh Chawla, Advocates for Victim-Complainant. WITH Page 1 of 49 Crl.A.500/2019 & Ors. + CRL.A. 819/2019 SUNIL alias ANNU ..... Appellant Through Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate with Mr. Mohit B., Advocate versus Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-26-2019
$~ * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 500/2019 ROHIT STATE Through Mr. R. M. Tufail, Advocate with ..... Appellant Mr. Farooq Chaudhary, Mr. Equebal Nasir and Mr. Naahid Nasir, Advocates. versus Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State ..... Respondent with Insp. Rajeev Ranjan, SI Jasmes Singh, PS Jahangir Puri. Mr. Kuber Giri with Mr. Sarvpreet Singh Chawla, Advocates for Victim-Complainant. WITH CRL.A. 504/2019 SHIV KUMAR @ SHIBU ..... Appellant Through Mr. R. M. Tufail, Advocate with Mr. Farooq Chaudhary, Mr. Equebal Nasir and Mr. Naahid Nasir, Advocates. STATE versus Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State ..... Respondent with Insp. Rajeev Ranjan, SI Jasmes Singh, PS Jahangir Puri. Mr. Kuber Giri with Mr. Sarvpreet Singh Chawla, Advocates for Victim-Complainant. WITH Page 1 of 49 Crl.A.500/2019 & Ors. + CRL.A. 819/2019 SUNIL alias ANNU ..... Appellant Through Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate with Mr. Mohit B., Advocate versus Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-26-2019
$~ * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 500/2019 ROHIT STATE Through Mr. R. M. Tufail, Advocate with ..... Appellant Mr. Farooq Chaudhary, Mr. Equebal Nasir and Mr. Naahid Nasir, Advocates. versus Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State ..... Respondent with Insp. Rajeev Ranjan, SI Jasmes Singh, PS Jahangir Puri. Mr. Kuber Giri with Mr. Sarvpreet Singh Chawla, Advocates for Victim-Complainant. WITH CRL.A. 504/2019 SHIV KUMAR @ SHIBU ..... Appellant Through Mr. R. M. Tufail, Advocate with Mr. Farooq Chaudhary, Mr. Equebal Nasir and Mr. Naahid Nasir, Advocates. STATE versus Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State ..... Respondent with Insp. Rajeev Ranjan, SI Jasmes Singh, PS Jahangir Puri. Mr. Kuber Giri with Mr. Sarvpreet Singh Chawla, Advocates for Victim-Complainant. WITH Page 1 of 49 Crl.A.500/2019 & Ors. + CRL.A. 819/2019 SUNIL alias ANNU ..... Appellant Through Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate with Mr. Mohit B., Advocate versus Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-07-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :02. 08.2019 Date of decision:07. 08.2019 W.P.(C) 10933/2018, CM APPL. 33734/2019, CM APPL.42590/2018, CM APPL. 33735/2019 DEEPANSHU BHADORIYA AND ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Sidharth Gupta, Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini & Mr. Somay Kapoor, Advocates. versus MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. T. Singhdev, Ms. Michelle, Ms.Puja Sarkar, Ms. Arunima, Ms.Sumangla & Mr. Tarun Verma, Advocates for MCI. Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate for R- 2 & 3. Mr. Nishit Agrawal & Mr. Harsh Mishra, Advocates for R-4. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, CGSC with Mr. Raghav Nagar, Advocate for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT ANU MALHOTRA, J.1. The petitioners namely Deepanshu Bhadoriya, Wadhwani Ashwin Ramesh, Aditi Pathak, Rahul Soni and Sneha Kumari participated in the W.P. (C) 10933/2018 Page 1 of 75 CBSE conducted NEET for UG medical courses in the year 2016 and state that they were eligible and qualifi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-29-2019
$~ 23 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-"29th August, 2019 RSA392019 & CM Nos. 22009/2019 & 8525/2019 PREM CHAND ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Y.S. Panwar, Adv. versus RAMBHOLI DEVI @ RAM BHOOLI DEVI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dwapayan Gupta with Ms. Shikha Goyal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) + 1. The respondent (decree holder) had instituted Civil Suit (7804/2016) against the appellant (judgment debtor) on 05.09.2013 praying for a decree for recovery of possession, arrears of rent and mesne profits (damages) in respect of premises described as a shop on the ground floor of property bearing No.592/22-B, Nakul Gali, Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi- 110032 (herein after referred to as suit shop).2. The decree holder claimed and the judgment debtor admitted that she was landlady in respect of the suit shop, he being a tenant therein, the tenancy having been created by a rent deed dated 01.07.2003 which was proved at the trial as Ex. P7. The ca...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-30-2019
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: Pronounced on:30. 09.2019 27.09.2019 + BAIL APPLN. 2270/2019 & Crl.M.A. 36692/2019 P. CHIDAMBARAM ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Kapil Sibal, Mr.Abhishek Manu Singhavi, Mr.Salman Khurshid, Mr.Vivek Tankha, Mr.A.S. Chandiok, Mr.N. Hari Haran, Mr.Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advs. with Mr.Arshdeep Singh Khurana, Mr.Kunal Vajani, Mr.Varun K. Chopra, Mr.Amit Bhandari, Mr.Adit Pujari, Mr.Hitesh Rai, Mr.Akshat Gupta, Mr.Ayush Agarwal, Mr.Karan Gogna, Mr.Aamir Khan, Mr.Aman Singh Brar, Mr.Akshay Sahni, Ms.Anshu Kapoor, Mr.Bilal Khan & Mr.R.V. Prabhat, Advs. versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Through Mr.Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, ..... Respondent Mr.Amit Mahajan & Mr.Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr.RajatNair & Mr.Kanu Agrawal, Spl. Counsels, for CBI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT JUDGMENT Vide the present bail petition, the... Petitioner/accused herein Sh. P. BAIL APPLN. 2270/2019 Page 1 of 47 Chidambaram seeks bail i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-23-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 1106/2018 % Judgment reserved on: September 27th, 2019 Judgment pronounced on:23. d October, 2019 AKASH ....Appellant Through: Mr. Chetan Lokur with Mr. Nitish Chaudhary, Advocates Versus State with SI Rajeshwar, PS STATE Palam Village ....Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the CORAM: SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL1 The present Appeal is instituted on behalf of the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) against the impugned judgment dated 13.07.2018 and order on sentence dated 18.07.2018 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dwarka Courts, Delhi, in Session Case No.440982/2016 in FIR No.157/2013, registered at Police Station Palam Village under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (hereinafter referred to as IPC) whereby the appellant was convicted for the offenc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-24-2019
$~8 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Delivered on :24. h October, 2019 + RFA3132018 MASYC PROJECTS PVT LTD ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Tarun Sharma, Ms.Akanksha Kapoor and Mr.Pradeep Singh, Advocates. versus NILACHAL IRON AND POWER LTD ..... Respondent and Through : Mr.Gaurav Kejriwal Mr.Gurpreet Hora, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant against the judgment and decree dated 19.12.2017 passed by the learned Additional District Judge- 06/West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred as the learned Trial Court) in CS No.11280/2016 whereby the suit filed by appellant for recovery of Rs.20,37,506/- was dismissed, primarily, on grounds of territorial jurisdiction.2. The brief facts which led to the filing of the suit, as are noted in impugned judgment are as under:-"1. xxxxxxxxx the plaintiff company is engaged in manufacture of material handling equipments like belt, conveyors, conveying a...
Tag this Judgment!