A division seat of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan, hearing Mehul Choksi's request against the request for a solitary appointed authority seat excusing his previous supplication looking for pre-screening of the narrative, conceded the issue for further.
The Delhi High Court recently deferred hearing on an appeal recorded by finance manager and diamantaire Mehul Choksi, who is a denounced in the PNB trick, against Netflix's narrative named "Awful Boy Billionaires". During the last hearing, Vijay Aggarwal Advocate had asked if it is Netflix allowed to abuse a person's major rights. Advocate Vijay Aggarwal in Delhi additionally asked whether Netflix's case to stay unregulated and being past the locale of writ courts in India is legitimate. Showing up for Mehul Choksi, Vijay Aggarwal Advocate & Lawyer, Mudit Jain and Anshul Agarwal contended that it is a tragedy of equity that an individual had moved toward the writ court for security of his crucial rights to a reasonable examination, which is an aspect under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, in any case, he was consigned to benefit his cures under the steady gaze of the common court. Senior lawyers Neeraj Kishan Kaul and Dayan Krishnan, showing up for Netflix, had contended that the appealing party isn't qualified for any alleviation, as he isn't a Citizen of India, as he has neglected his citizenship, and in this manner, not qualified for the security of any crucial right. READ MORE – VIJAY AGGARWAL ADVOCATE INTERNSHIP IN DELHI Prior, Mehul Choksi's supplication was excused by the single seat of Justice Naveen Chawla, who saw that there are no guidelines to control the substance on the ludicrous (OTT) media administration, and requested that he approach the proper gathering or document a common suit in the issue. The narrative, which is supposed to be founded on the ascent and fall of India's most notorious very rich people including Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi different business magnates charged in a few affirmed tricks, was planned to deliver. In any case, the arrival of the narrative was remained by a Hyderabad court. A Bihar court had additionally controlled Netflix from utilizing Sahara bunch executive Subrata Roy's name in its narrative - "Bad Boy Billionaires". In his supplication under the watchful eye of the single-judge seat, Mehul Choksi had looked for pre-screening of the narrative and headings to the Central government to find a way to manage the Netflix Inc and Netflix Entertainment Service India LLP to the extent that the arrival of substance having the conceivably biased impact on forthcoming examinations and preliminaries is concerned.
0 Comments
The Delhi High Court as of late pulled up the Delhi Police for persuasively expelling a lady from her marital home and guided the Commissioner to make a move against the officials who removed her before the expiry of the specified period.
A solitary appointed authority seat of Justice Navin Chawla likewise coordinated the rebuilding of ownership by the girl in-law in her wedding house. As per the appeal, recorded by the lady, District Magistrate (South) had as of late passed a request for her ousting, which was conveyed to the solicitor. "Before the solicitor could even exercise her entitlement to request the equivalent, inside the 30-day time frame gave by the Impugned Order and Rule 22(3) (3) (I) of the Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, (Amendment) Rules, 2016, the Delhi Police ousted her on September 20 during a pandemic circumstance and in a generally stunning and fierce way," the supplication said. Vijay Aggarwal Advocate in Delhi and Naman Joshi, showing up for the lady, looked for activities against the Delhi Police for persuasively and wrongfully ousting her from her wedding home, under implied execution of a request went under the Senior Citizens Act. The solicitor guaranteed that the request passed as of late had given her 30 days to oust the premises, notwithstanding, even before the expiry of the said period and before she could advance the equivalent, she needed to confront a few officials of the Delhi Police, including female officials, who forcibly removed her, her two significant youngsters, two servants and two canines from the premises. ALSO READ VIJAY AGGARWAL ADVOCATE INTERNSHIP IN DELHI Advocate Vijay Aggarwal contended that grave unfairness has been caused to his customer, as she needed to confront unlawful and out of line treatment on account of Delhi Police. He played a video cut, to get back the way that his customer was coercively removed, however the request had furnished her with 30 days to do as such. He brought up the most extreme and remarkable rush where a request was unlawfully executed by the Delhi Police inside two days of its being passed and furthermore called attention to that for the expulsion of his customer and two youngsters, more than 10-15 officials of the Delhi Police had shown up, wearing covers. The legal counselor said that there was at that point a previous request for his customer under the Domestic Violence Act case and he called attention to the contention between the Protection of Domestic Violence Act and the Maintenance of Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, and contended that there are decisions of the Delhi High Court that the equivalent should be agreeably understood, however the District Magistrate didn't think about the equivalent. The advice showing up for the Delhi Police presented that the move was made as far as specific perceptions made by the Magistrate under the DV Act and that the Delhi Police comprehended to be inside its obligation to spare the senior resident's from any further hopelessness. The insight, showing up for the dad in-law and relative of the lady, submitted as now the girl in-law was removed from the premises, she ought not be requested to be returned to the premises, as there are a few questions between the gatherings and the equivalent will make peril the life and appendage of his customers. 9/28/2020 Vijay Aggarwal Advocate Argued – Over 10K Pending Appeals In Delhi HC But CBI Focusing On 2G AppealRead Now Restricting the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) application for early hearing in the 2G request against vindication, Advocate Vijay Aggarwal speaking to financial specialist Shahid Balwa recently contended that in excess of 10,000 claims are as yet forthcoming of the individuals who are in prison under the steady gaze of Delhi High Court and there is no motivation behind why inclination ought to be given to the leave appeal documented by CBI which is against an exoneration which was conceded after every day preliminary.
Vijay Aggarwal Advocate likewise submitted, "Indian lawful framework doesn't cut to be hypothesis of dog the blamed at all expense by implies reasonable or foul". A solitary appointed authority seat of Justice Brijesh Sethi recently held the request on the supplication after all the gatherings closed their contentions. Lawyer Tarannum Cheema contended that her customer Sanjay Chandra is in legal care and was presented with the application today itself and requirements fourteen day's an ideal opportunity to record an answer to the leave appeal, notwithstanding, she contended that her customer Sanjay Chandra is in legal authority and is allowed just two video meetings for every week henceforth we won't have the option to take viable directions. Sanjay Jain, Additional Solicitor General speaking to CBI and ED contended that significant public time has just been devoured. An adjudicator can generally choose how much time is needed to hear a matter...If veritable endeavours are made and help is delivered it's conceivable to take this issue to an obvious end result, ASG Jain included. All the respondents including previous Telecom Minister A Raja and others have firmly contradicted the use of the CBI and ED. Supporter Manu Sharma showing up for A Raja had recently contended that there was no reason to concede an amiss dire hearing to the bids moved by CBI and ED in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. The examination organization has just spoken about open enthusiasm for their application yet has not validated the equivalent with contentions, he said. Equity Brijesh Sethi, who is hearing the allure of ED and CBI against the preliminary court request which vindicated all the blamed in the 2G case, is resigning on 30th November this year. He had as of late gave notice to all respondents to record an answer on the early hearing supplication documented by the CBI and Enforcement Directorate (ED). Ref - https://medium.com/@vijayaggarwaladvocate/vijay-aggarwal-advocate-argued-over-10k-pending-appeals-in-delhi-hc-but-cbi-focusing-on-2g-appeal-6d10ec4dfcbf Vijay Aggarwal Advocate showing up for previous Telecom Minister, A. Raja in the 2G Scam case recorded down the challenges of contending through Video Conferencing for a situation with an enormous number of documents under the watchful eye of the Delhi High Court.
A solitary appointed authority seat of Justice Brijesh Sethi while hearing the issue through video conferencing heard the contentions of the respondents. One of the requests was recorded by Conwood Construction and Developers (P) Ltd, an Accused in the 2G Prevention of Money Laundering case, looking for the arrival of the properties connected by the ED by outfitting a repayment security. Eminently, the CBI and ED had moved the Delhi High Court in March 2018 against the vindication of all charged in the 2G range case which became known in 2017. Vijay Aggarwal Lawyer presented that the application moved by CBI and ED is a 'counterblast' of the application moved by A. Raja for the arrival of property. Though, ASG Sanjay Jain showing up for the CBI presented that it is a simple fortuitous event and our application has been deferred as a result of the persevering circumstance in the midst of the COVID19 flare-up. On which Advocate Vijay Kumar Aggarwal fought that it's anything but an occurrence, it is a very much idea plan. Advocate Tarannum Cheema showing up for one of the respondents Mr. Sanjay Chandra presented that he is serving in Tihar Jail and had not been served a duplicate yet. Lawyer Vijay Kumar Aggarwal likewise presented that the scholarly ASG must explain on the 'public intrigue', how this application is moved by them is in the public intrigue. Advocate & Lawyer Vijay Aggarwal further included that 3 of my 4 customers are from Mumbai and 1 from Delhi, none of them can head out to both of the spots because of the overall circumstance, at that point by what method will take guidelines. We contend on the customer's guidelines. We don't have the benefit of being advised by CBI, that lone Mr. Jain has. Vijay Aggarwal further did a correlation of the prior excused application with the new application, in which everything is the equivalent. "I'm liable for awakening the resting monster, as I moved the application for arrival of property," Mr. Aggarwal included. After this Mr. Aggarwal looked for time from the court and mentioned for a knowing about the issue again tomorrow, he expressed that "I'll proceed with tomorrow." The seat permitted the equivalent and has guided the candidates to serve a duplicate to Mr. Chandra in prison at the most punctual. Reference - https://medium.com/@vijayaggarwaladvocate/advocate-vijay-aggarwal-questioned-hc-about-rajas-video-conferencing-f79e7df57f3a 9/23/2020 Ajnara Group Restrained From Creating Third Party Interest – Advocate Vijay Aggarwal CommentedRead Now The Delhi High Court has controlled Ajnara Group from making any further outsider premiums in its venture Times Square, after the charge of cheating RR Buildtech by selling the last's property to a bank.
A seat of Justice C Hari Shankar, in a between time request on Thursday, controlled Ajnara India and its auxiliary from making any further outsider interests in its undertaking Times Square and the land admeasuring 7,486 square meters in Noida on which the venture was to come up. Further, Ajnara India and its auxiliary were asked to clarify for what valid reason they ought not be coordinated to make sure about a measure of around Rs 50.51 crores that is as a matter of fact owed to RR Buildtown. Vijay Aggarwal Advocate, showing up for RR Buildtown, presented that Ajnara India had taken around Rs 34 crores from RR Buildtown to co-build up the land in Noida financially in the year 2015. The task called Times Square was to be a significant business center, however, regardless of taking cash from RR Buildtown, Ajnara India didn't begin any chip away at the undertaking. Advocate Vijay Aggarwal likewise called attention to that Ajnara India had sold the Times Squad land to Punjab National Bank Housing Finance for an advance of Rs 45 crores despite the fact that the market estimation of the land was around Rs 140 crores. Further, this advance was taken without the assent of RR Buildtown despite the fact that it possessed 45 percent value in the SPV with Ajnara India and had two chiefs on the SPV's board, the attorney said including that as such the bank couldn't give the advance itself. The supplication fought that Ajnara India and its auxiliary were each other's modify sense of self to such an extent that their enlisted addresses and email IDs were additionally the equivalent and this was a fit case for the lifting of the corporate cloak. "Besides, when the Rs 45 crores were dispensed by the Punjab National Bank Housing Finance, just Rs 10 crores was kept in the SPV which possessed the Times Square land and Rs 35 crores were given to Ajnara India for its own advantage," the request said. It said that taking into account Ajnara's problematic budgetary situation just as its default in compliance in all cases, they may even default on their credits taken from the bank and put the property of RR Buildtown itself in danger of abandonment. Reference - https://sites.google.com/view/vijayaggarwaladvocate/latest-news/vijay-aggarwal-advocate-news-3 9/15/2020 Accused Bail Plea Dismissed In firing at AAP MLA - Vijay Aggarwal Advocate Appeared Behalf Of ComplainantRead Now A session court of the Patiala House Court here excused the bail supplication of a blamed captured for supposedly terminating at AAP MLA Naresh Yadav's caravan in southwest Delhi which prompted a passing of a volunteer in February this year. Extra Sessions Judge Sanjay Khanagwal excused the bail supplication of Dharamvir false name Kalu thinking about the realities and conditions, the gravity of the offense, and the function of charged. "For this situation, the offense affirmed against the blamed is not kidding in nature; his quality alongside the principle aggressor is reflected in the announcement of the observers under Section 161 of CrPC. Besides, recuperation of weapon of offense is expressed to have been influenced in compatibility of his divulge articulation of the candidate," the court said. "Up until this point, as the ground of equality with the bail allowed to the co-denounced is concerned, the equivalent isn't accessible to the charged thinking about his job and recuperation. The grumbling of a danger given by the harmed Harender Mann to the SHO PS Kishangarh, New Delhi can't be overlooked at this stage, in spite of the fact that the equivalent is the topic of examination by the SHO," the court included. Advocate Pradeep Rana, showing up for the denounced Dharamvir looked for abandon the ground of equality with his co-blamed sibling Somraj moniker Dhami and on the ground that there were errors in the FIR. Though showing up for the complainant, advocate Vijay Aggarwal, Jagdeep Sharma and Barkha Rastogi, intensely restricted the bail application, calling attention to that the bail allowed to the co-charged was under test under the watchful eye of the High Court of Delhi. Vijay Aggarwal Advocate called attention to different bogus deceiving pleadings and coverings in the bail use of the charged. It was brought up that the Accused had not moved toward the Court with clean hands, as the bail application was asserted to be "First bail application under Section 439 of Criminal Code of Procedure (CrPC)," though the equivalent was his Second Bail Application. Further, in the bail application, the candidate/denounced was appeared to have clean forerunners; nonetheless, Lawyer Vijay Aggarwal carried it to the information on the Court that there was another FIR enlisted in 2015 against him and his co-charged siblings, wherein the case is going on in Patiala House Court. It was additionally brought up that the charged is known as the "muscleman of the region" which in certainty was likewise referenced by the Investigating Officer in his answer to the bail application, Vijay Aggarwal Lawyer contended. A guard of the AAP party was in progress in Mehrauli, which was getting back from a sanctuary following a success of an AAP MLA in the gathering political race. Around then, charged people had purportedly shot the perished Ashok Maan, a 45-year-old Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) volunteer, in which assault the expired's relative Harender was likewise harmed. A FIR was enrolled under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and different segments in Kishangarh in February this year. Reference - https://sites.google.com/view/vijayaggarwaladvocate/latest-news/vijay-aggarwal-advocate-news-1 ABOUT Vijay Aggarwal Metropolitan Law Firm Metropolitan Law Firm is a complete law firm with the office in Delhi. The lawyers in the firm are highly-qualified and master in their practice area. The metropolitan law associate has handled several projects and also advises on legal issues. Started with a vision to provide efficient solutions on legal issues, the firm is recognized for its best law services. Requirement Metropolitan Law Firm: Selected intern's day-to-day responsibilities include: 1. Drafting agreements, MOUs, deeds etc. 2. Making PPTs on legal topics 3. Reviewing/vetting of agreements 4. Liasoning with departments 5. Making case summary and legal notices 6. Replying to legal queries Important: This posting is for corporate practice and the candidate shall not be assigned litigation work. Who can apply for Internship for Vijay Aggarwal Metropolitan Law Associates: Only those students or freshers can apply who: are available for full time (in-office) internship have relevant skills and interests can start the internship as early as possible are available for duration of 30 days have already graduated or are currently in any year of study Females willing to start/restart their career may also apply Number of internships/jobs available: 1 Categories: Law Enforcement Directorate step to plea against Ratul Puri bail has seen disappointment recently. The Delhi Court rejected its request to cancel the bail granted to him in AgustaWestland money laundering case. Justice Suresh Kait with his single Judge Bench said that “It was decided that once the bail has been given, it cannot be canceled mechanically. It cannot be canceled without taking into account the extraordinary circumstances that are unfavorable for a fair trial. There is no denying fact that, the bail can only be revoked for those who discerning few cases where it is proved that the people who were granted bail is misusing the same but in this case all of these facts are lost" Following the decision of the Supreme Court in Dolat Ram and others vs. the State of Haryana, the Court found that the bail could be cancelled only on the basis of interference or attempts at the functioning of the judiciary, disguises or efforts to ensure the functioning of the judiciary or abuse of the concession granted to the accused in any manner. The court also found that the investigation of the AgustaWestland case had been going on for more than five years and that 46 defendants sued 25 abroad. Added further “Although the investigation may take years to complete, Puri has been serving 100 days of pre-trial detention and has been questioned significantly” It was also found that Puri is not a risk of running away because he is rooted in the community and is not afraid of influencing witnesses because their statements have become part of the court records. In view of the above, the Court concluded that there was no reason to interfere in the granting of guarantees. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) arrested Ratul Puri on dated September 2019. He has finally remained in pre-trial detention after detention from ED. Puri was arrested after a forward-looking application was rejected by the CBI court and the Supreme Court on the grounds that the investigation of the case for his role was at an important stage. The role of Ratul Puri in the AgustaWestland case arose after the deportation of Rajiv Saxena and Sushen Mohan Gupta from Dubai in early 2019. According to Puri prosecutors, there was incriminating evidence, including Susan Mohan Gupta's diary and e-mails restored by Rajiv Saxena, revealing that Puri had received the results from AgustaWestland transaction. ED claims that Puri uses the guise of shellfish companies to collect proceeds of crime, which are then parked and washed for other beneficiaries who are willing. ED then submitted an additional letter to Puri in the Agustawestland case. Puri received bail from CBI on 02-Dec-2019 from the Special CBI Judge ED was represented by Standing Counsel Amit Mahajan with ASG KM Nataraj. Senior advocates represented Ratul’s case which includes Advocate Vijay Aggarwal, Vikas Pahwa , Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Kapil Sibbal, Sahil Goyal, Rudrashish Bhardwaj, Akshay Gadeock, Hardik Sharma, Yugant Sharma, Ansh Kukreja, Sumer Bopari, Vikas Pahwa , Mudit Jain, Ayush Jindal, Barkha Rastogi, Deepanshu Choithani, Vafee Haider, Varun Chopra. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
July 2023
Categories |