Delhi Court February 2009 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Geetika Batra Vs. O.P. Batra and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ2687
Aruna Suresh, J.1. By way of this petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') the petitioner Geetika Batra has assailed the order of the trial court dated 22.08.2007 passed in Complaint Case No. 63/1/2006 whereby the petitioner was summoned for offences punishable under Sections 182/211/499/500 Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC').2. Factual matrix of the case is that, petitioner was married to Rohit Batra on 18.11.2000. Due to matrimonial disharmony between the two, petitioner filed a complaint on 27.6.2001 before the Crime Against Women (CAW) Cell, Ashok Vihar. The said matter was reconciled somewhere in July or September, 2001 and thereafter petitioner started living with her husband; Rohit Batra. A son was born out of the wedlock of the parties on 21.09.2001. In August, 2002 Rohit Batra got employment at Bombay and the couple shifted to Bombay where petitioner lived with him. She came to Delhi on 25.5.2003 due t...
Ravinder Garg Vs. the Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 2009BusLR269(Del)
Aruna Suresh, J.1. Present petition has been filed by petitioner, Ravinder Garg seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 10.5.2006 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate in case 'Government of NCT of Delhi v. Sh. Naveen Kumar' under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as PFA Act).2. On 27.7.2005 Food Inspector, Department of Prevention of Food Adulteration purchased sample of ghee of brand 'Mahaan' for analysis from one Sh. Naveen Kumar of M/s. Apna Bazar, Gurgaon Road, Roshan Pura who was engaged in the business of selling ghee of said brand. The sample consisted of 3x1 litre sealed tetra packs bearing the label 'Mahaan', bearing the identical label declaration. This sample was taken under the supervision/direction of the then SDM/LHA in its original sealed condition. The sample was divided into three equal parts by the Food Inspector on the spot and sample counterpart was separately packed, fastened and sealed. The Food Inspect...
Baldev Raj Kapur Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1418; 157(2009)DLT747
Aruna Suresh, J.1. Impugning the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 25.4.2005 whereby the trial court, while discharging the petitioner for offences under Sections 304A/308 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) concluded that, prima facie a case for offences under Sections 304 Part II/308 IPC was made out against the petitioner.2. In brief the allegations of the prosecution against the petitioner are that, he is the owner of Shop No. 23, DDA Market, Shanti Store, Punjabi Bagh, Delhi. On 22.10.2002, the said four-storeyed building, which was under construction, collapsed. This resulted into death of six labourers and grievous injuries to eight labourers. Injured Arun Kumar, who was working as mason in the said building made a statement to the police in the hospital and on his statement FIR No. 832/2002 for offences under Sections 304/308/427/34 IPC was registered at Police Station Punjabi Bagh against the petitioner and co-accused Mohd. Kaif. Petitioner...
Dalbir Singh Vs. B.S.E.S. Rajdhani Power Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 2009LC(DEL)303
ORDERS. Muralidhar, J.1. This petition is directed against the impugned order dated 30th November 2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge ('ASJ') Special Electricity Court in Complaint Case No. 421/06 holding that a prima facie case was made out to try the Petitioner for the offence under Section 135(2) of the Electricity Act 2003 ('Act'). It also challenges an order passed on the same date by the learned ASJ framing notice against the Petitioner for the offence under Section 135(b) of the Act. The prayer in this petition is that the learned ASJ should be directed to hear the Petitioner on charge and pass orders accordingly.2. The facts in brief are that an inspection was conducted by the officers of the respondent BSES Rajdhani Power Limited ('BRPL') in the premises of the Petitioner at WZ-30A, Ground floor, Channa Mal Park, East Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. According to the officers of BRPL the inspection revealed that the Petitioner was indulging in dishonest abstraction of...
St. Ives Laboratories Inc. Vs. Arif Perfumers and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: LC2009(2)103; 2009(40)PTC104(Del)
Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. This suit has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 134 and 135 of The Trade Marks Act as well as under Section 51 and 55 of the Copyright Act and under Specific Relief Act seeking permanent injunction of various nature against the defendants. In the title of suit, the address of the plaintiff is that of USA and the address of the defendants is of Maharashtra. The suit has been filed in Delhi on the ground that the defendants were surreptitiously and clandestinely trading their goods under the impugned trademark and labels in Delhi and other parts of the country as well and another ground is that plaintiff's trademark was registered with Registry of Trade Marks at Delhi and plaintiff was also having its business in Delhi through its authorized importer and distributor and that plaintiff holds excellent goodwill and reputation in Delhi.2. It is argued that this Court has jurisdiction to try and adjudicate this suit under Section 134(2) of the Trade Marks A...
St. Ives Laboratories Inc. Vs. Mr. Sunny Bakshi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 2009(41)PTC231(Del)
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.1. The plaintiff a company incorporated under the laws of USA instituted the present suit with respect to its trademark/labels SWISS FORMULA, ST. IVES, device of VILLAGE, its trade dress, colour scheme, artistic features, copyrights, trade name etc. and claimed the decree of permanent injunction against the defendant No. 1 carrying on business in the name and style of defendant No. 2 from infringing the aforesaid trade mark, trade dress, copyright of the plaintiff and or from passing off their goods as that of the plaintiff. The ancillary reliefs of delivery, rendition of accounts, damages, costs etc. are also claimed. Vide ex-parte order dated 27th February, 2007 this Court finding a prima-facie case in favour of the plaintiff, restrained the defendants, their agents and representatives from manufacturing, selling, using, displaying, advertising, exporting, importing or otherwise dealing with the trade make ST. IVES, device of VILLAGE and trade dress or any other...
Darpan Kwatra Vs. Ramesh Chanana
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 157(2009)DLT640
Manmohan, J.1. Present civil revision petition has been filed against the order dated 4th October, 2008 whereby the respondent/plaintiff's application under Order 6 Rule 17 and Order 1 Rule 10 has been allowed and the petitioner/defendant's application under Order 7 Rules 14 and 17 has been dismissed.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the application under Order 6 Rule 17 and Order 1 Rule 10 has been allowed without hearing him. He has also drawn my attention to the order dated 18th May, 2007 whereby the matter was adjourned to facilitate the petitioner to file documents in support of his plea that Sh. Ramesh Kwatra was the proprietor of M/s. Bharat Plastic Industries. He further states that though the trial court looked at form ST-35 dated 22nd March, 2006, but it did not look into other correspondence as well as other ST-35's which clearly shows that Sh. Ramesh Kwatra was the proprietor of the firm to the respondent's knowledge for a long time.3. On a perusal of the ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jindal Exports Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: (2009)221CTR(Del)8; [2009]314ITR137(Delhi); [2009]179TAXMAN391(Delhi)
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. In these appeals two sets of substantial questions of law have been formulated. They are:Question A : Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that rectification could not be made by the AO under Section 154 of the IT Act, 1961 as the issue regarding charging of interest under Section 234B of the Act without giving set off of MAT credit available to the assessee was highly debatable ?Question B : Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that credit of tax paid under Section 115JAA can be given before computing interest under Section 234C of the IT Act, 1961?2. Question A has been formulated in IT Appeal Nos. 402 of 2005, 407 of 2007, 907 of 2007, 914 of 2007, 969 of 2007, 989 of 2007, 1350 of 2007, 546 of 2008, 701 of 2008, and 893 of 2008. Question B has been framed in IT Appeal Nos. 1474 of 2006, 708 of 2007, 719 of 2007, 791 of 2007, 829 of 2007, 986 of 2007, 992 of 2007, 1063 of 2007, 271 of 2008, 272 of 2008, 295 of 2008, 344 of 2008, 4...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nalwa Investment Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: [2009]179TAXMAN262(Delhi)
Rajiv Shakdher, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the judgment dated 29-7-2005 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in ITA No. 1705/Delhi/2002 pertaining to assessment year 1995-96. Vide the impugned judgment the Tribunal has also disposed of ITA No. 1704/ Delhi/2002 pertaining to assessment year 1994-95 with which we are not concerned in the present appeal.1.1 By our order dated 7-11 -2008 we had admitted the appeal and framed the following question of law:(i) Whether the loss determined by the Assessing Officer, being different from the loss as claimed by the assessee in the return, can be carried forward in view of the provisions of Section 80 read with Section 139(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?(ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Tribunal has erred in law in holding that the Assessing Officer ...
Rekha Vs. the State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 158(2009)DLT60
Aruna Suresh, J.1. The prosecution swung into action when a secret information was received on 1.8.2000 at about 10.45 AM at Police Station Narcotics Branch that Salim and Rekha who were indulged in the trade of supplying smack at Delhi after procuring it from Madhya Pradesh would be coming in between 12.00 to 1.00 PM for supplying smack in Sector 16, Rohini. They would be carrying huge quantity of smack with them. On this information DD No. 5 dated 1.8.2000 was recorded at Police Station Narcotics Branch, Delhi. Inspector Chandra Prabha, SHO, Narcotics Branch, was accordingly informed who in turn informed Mr. M.S. Chikara, ACP on telephone. Mr. M.S. Chikara instructed her to carry out immediate raid. Copy of the DD was also sent to the senior officers by post.2. SI Attar Singh organized a raiding party consisting of himself, Inspector Chandra Prabha, HC Paramjeet, Const. Naresh, Const. Dilawar, Const. Ravinder, Const. Virender and two drivers namely Const. Vijay and Const. Surat Singh...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »