Delhi Court November 2010 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2010 Page 2 of about 90 results (0.011 seconds)Citi Bank Na Vs. Indu Kaul
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Barkat Ali Zaidi, President: 1. The short facts of the case are that the complainant had taken home loan of Rs. 4 lacs from the OP Bank, pledging as security some title documents of her property with the OP Bank. Despite paying off the loan amount, the OP bank did not return her the title documents, on the ground that on 2.7.2002 Rs. 20,558.74 were due towards the credit facility availed by her, while the case of the complainant is that there were no such dues. The complainant on these allegations, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, filed a complaint before District Forum against the OP Bank. 2. The OP opposed the claim and filed the written statement denying all the adverse allegations and pleaded that on 20.7.2002, Rs. 20,558.74, were due towards the credit card facility against her, and unless she pays, she is not entitled to get her title deed restored to her. 3. The District Forum on consideration of evidence of both the parties directed the Bank to return h...
Tag this Judgment!Uoi and ors. Vs. Vijender Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
1. The above captioned 5 writ petitions are being decided by a common judgment and order for the reason issue which arises for consideration in all the writ petitions is identical.2. Vide W.P.(C) No.1188-90/2005 order dated 13.5.2004 allowing OA No.2710/2003 is under challenge. Vide W.P.(C) No.1723/2010 and W.P.(C) No.1726/2010 the order dated 14.7.2009 allowing OA No.2542/2008 and OA No.220/2009 is under challenge. Vide W.P.(C) No.1724/2010 the order dated 16.7.2009 allowing OA No.1847/2008 is under challenge. Vide W.P.(C) No.1725/2010 the order dated 12.5.2009 allowing OA No.1749/2008 is under challenge.3. It may be noted that the orders dated 14.7.2009, 16.7.2009 and 25.12.2009 are simply following the reasoning of the order dated 13.5.2004 and thus we would be noting the relevant facts relatable to OA No.2710/2003; decision wherein is the subject matter of challenge vide W.P.(C) No.1188- 90/2005.4. The claimants before the Tribunal i.e. the respondents in all the writ petitions wer...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Great Eastern Exports .and ors. Vs. the Commissioner O F Income Ta ...
Court: Delhi
1. In all these appeals, we are concerned with the manner in which profits and gains of the business are to be ascertained before computing the relief under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter would be referred to as the Act). There are certain deductions which are allowed under Section 80IA of the Act as well. Therefore, to put it precisely question for consideration is: once a particular Undertaking or Enterprise becomes entitled to claim and is ITA 267 OF 2008, ITA 1316 OF 2008, ITA 4 OF 2009, Page 2 of 37 ITA 907 OF 2009, ITA 906 OF 2008, ITA 1002 OF 2008 allowed deduction of certain amount of the profits and gains under Section 80IA of the Act, whether deduction to the extent of such profits claimed under Section 80IA would not be allowed for computing deduction under Section 80 HHC or whether the profits and gains are to be computed and deduction undertaken independently all over again, irrespective of the deduction already claimed and allowed under Section 80 IA of ...
Tag this Judgment!Bal Kishan Gupta and ors. Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
1. Briefly stating the facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that appellants filed a suit for mandatory injunction alleging that they are the owners of the land comprised in Khasrano.1756/2, Khewat No.195, situated in the revenue estate of Village Naraina, Delhi, measuring 1 Bigha,5 Biswas, which was their ancestral property. The suit property was devolved upon the appellants on the death of their father and husband of proforma defendant No.4 vide mutation No.3254 dated 21.09.1991. The adjoining piece of land of the suit property comprised in Khasra No.1756/1 was acquired by the Govt. and was handed over to Horticulture Deptt. of MCD for maintaining a park. In the year 1991, MCD made a fencing over the portion of the suit land pertaining to appellants which is about 250 sq.yds. as shown in red in the site plan. Appellants stated that they went pillar to post during 1992-1998 but the fencing was not removed.2. Respondent filed their WS. It was alleged that suit was bad for non-...
Tag this Judgment!Jaiprakash and ors. Vs. Uoi and ors .
Court: Delhi
1. The writ petitioners have claimed that they had joined service with the Joint Cipher Bureau of the Directorate of Standardization and Indian Air Force under the Ministry of Defence, Government of India. At the time of filing of the writ petitions, the petitioners were working on the post of Offset Machine Man Operator (Grade I) in the Joint Directorate of Publication (Air Headquarter) in the Ministry of Defence and belonged to the printing press staff of the defence establishment to that of the Government of India press employees.2. The petitioners have complained that the recommendations in the Fifth Central Pay Commission are arbitrary for the reason that they have failed to maintain parity of scale with similar posts which are under the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Communication and elsewhere.3. The above narration shows that the petitioners are in fact civilian employees in defence service under the Ministry of Defence. An objection was taken by Mr. Ankur Chhibber, learned c...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
1. Though various questions of law were proposed in this appeal, the appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: "(i) Whether ITAT was correct in law in allowing provision made by the assessee for future losses that may occur on account of different project works undertaken by it? (ii) Whether ITAT was correct in law in holding that the provision for losses was allowable as the assessee was following completed contract method of accounting?"2. The facts germane to the aforesaid questions need only be noted and the same are capitulated hereunder.3. This appeal pertains to the Assessment Year 2000-01. For this Assessment Year, the respondent assessee had filed the return declaring a loss @ `12.58 Crores. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the assessee had debited a sum of `139 lacs to the Profit and Loss Account as provision for losses, which occur for different projects undertaken by it. These projects had been substantially...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Mundhe Kailas Maharudra Vs. All India Institute of Medical Science ...
Court: Delhi
1.The present appeal is directed against the order dated 28th September, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP (C) No. 6436/2010.2. The facts which are requisite to be exposited are that the firstrespondent, namely, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (for shortAIIMS) while conducting admission for the post of Post-Graduate / PostDoctoral / MDS pursuant to entrance test held in May, 2010 did not considerthe case of the appellant in the general category on the base and foundationthat he belongs to OBC category.3. The learned Single Judge referred to his own order dated 19th August, 2010 passed in WP (C) No. 4230/2010 (Dr. Jagveer Singh v. The Chairperson, Counselling Committee, Academic Section, AIIMS) and opined that the action taken by the AIIMS was unsustainable and issued directions to the said respondent to allow candidates belonging to the reserved category to compete in the general / unreserved category from the next academic session.4. Be it noted, though the learned...
Tag this Judgment!S.Thamizh Muthar Pavalan Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
1. Under the Indian Legal Service there exists a post of Deputy Legal Advisor which is a duty post in Grade III. The post has to be filled up by direct recruitment. Rule 7 of Indian Legal Service Rules 1957 regulate appointment to duty posts in the service and covers direct recruitment to posts in Grade I, Grade II, Grade III and Grade IV.2. In the present case we are concerned with appointment to duty post by direct recruitment in Grade III and hence we reproduce the relevant part of Rule 7:- "7. APPOINTMENT TO DUTY POST BY DIRECT RECRUITMENT:1) A person shall not be eligible for appointment by direct recruitment-a) to a duty post in Grade III, unless he holds a Degree in Law of a recognized University or equivalent and unless he has been a member of a State Judicial Service for a period of not less than ten years or has held a superior post in the legal department of a State for a period of not less than ten years of a Central Government servant who has had experience in legal affair...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Late Sh. Raj Pal Bhatia and ors.
Court: Delhi
1. All these appeals arise out of the common order dated 11th July, 2008 passed by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal thereby allowing three appeals of the assessees/respondents and deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The respondents were the brothers and two of them passed away during the pendency of the Income Tax proceedings. Their spouses were impleaded in their place in their capacity as the legal heirs. These brothers were the joint owners of property bearing no. 112, Golf Link, New Delhi, which was sold to Sh. Sunil Charla and his wife Smt. Sureksha Charla. The additions in the income of these three brothers were made qua Block Assessment proceedings on the premise that consideration of the said property was under-stated in the sale deed executed by these assessees in favour of the aforesaid two purchasers. According to the Department, the actual price received was ` 6.5 crores, the consideration shown in the sale deed was only ` 1.40 crores. The additions made ...
Tag this Judgment!Tej Pal Yadav Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
1.In this intra-Court appeal preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, the sustainability of the order dated 13th August, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.5492/2010 is called in question.2. The facts which are essential to be stated for adjudication of this appeal are that the appellant had appeared for the All India Pre-Medical / Pre-Dental Entrance Examination held by the Central Board of Secondary Education, the respondent No.4 herein, for admission to the 15% All India LPA 611/2010 Page 1 of 16 seats quota in the Medical Colleges all over the country. As per the stipulations in the prospectus, the appellant appeared in the Preliminary Examination as an OBC candidate and secured 49.2% marks in the said examination as a result of which he qualified to appear in the final examination. He appeared in the final examination and secured 72.3% marks and was placed at serial No.3017 in the All India Rank and Counselling Category Rank of 2965 (OBC 1179). As per th...
Tag this Judgment!