Delhi Court December 2010 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2010 Page 4 of about 211 results (0.019 seconds)Namgyal Dolkar Vs. Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs
Court: Delhi
1. By a letter dated 1st September 2009 the Regional Passport Officer, Delhi ( RPO') informed the Petitioner that a decision had been taken by the Ministry of External Affairs ( MEA') that a passport could not be issued in her favour under Section 6(2)(a) of the Passports Act, 1967 ( PA') as she could not be treated as an Indian national under Section 3(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 ( CA'). The said decision has been challenged in this writ petition. The Petitioner further seeks a declaration that she is an Indian citizen.2. The Petitioner was born on 13th April 1986 in Kangra, Himachal Pradesh and claims that she is an Indian citizen by birth. Admittedly, both her parents are Tibetan refugees, born in Tibet. A copy of her birth certificate is enclosed with the writ petition.3. The Petitioner states that on 21st April 2005 pursuant to an application made by her, an Identity Certificate bearing no. 025942 was issued to her. Inter alia, the certificate stated as under: This certific...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Sanjeev Behl Vs. M/S Silvertone Motors Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
This is a suit for recovery of Rs.28,74,316.24p. The case of the plaintiff is that he has been selling material to the defendant, on credit, since 2nd August, 2003 and the defendant company has been making payment in account to him. A sum of Rs.25,84,708.14p is alleged to be due from the defendant company towards balance price of the goods sold to it by the plaintiff. The plaintiff has claimed that amount from the defendant along with interest thereon @12% p.a. amounting to Rs.2,89,608.10p.2. Before filing this suit, the plaintiff had filed a suit against the defendant before the learned District Judge, Delhi for recovery of price of the goods sold by him to the defendant during the period from 20th March, 2008 to 29th June, 2009. The case of the defendant is that since the present suit is based on invoices for the period from 2nd August, 2003 to 30 th June, 2009, it is barred under Order II Rule 2 CPC. It is further alleged that the amount alleged to be overdue since the years 2003-04...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Akhtar @ Rahul Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
These three appeals have been filed by the three accused-appellants challenging their conviction and punishment awarded to them by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.50 of 2006. Vide judgment dated 17th September,2007 accused-appellants have been convicted under Section 392 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code('IPC' in short) and accused-appellant Mohd. Akhtar @ Rahul has been additionally held guilty under Sections 411 and 397 IPC also and vide order dated 24th September,2007 all the three accused-appellants were awarded 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.5000/- each with a default stipulation that they shall have to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of one year in case of default in payment of fine. For the conviction under Section 411 IPC accused-appellant Mohd. Akhtar @ Rahul was separately awarded sentence of rigorous imprisonment of three years and his substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run consecutive...
Tag this Judgment!Ht Media Limited Vs. Firefly E-ventures Limited
Court: Delhi
This application under Sections 391 to 394 read with Sections 100- 104 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act for short) has been filed by HT Media Limited (Transferee Company for short) in respect of the scheme of arrangement and restructuring between them and Firefly e-Ventures Limited (Transferor Company for short). Copy of the scheme has been enclosed as annexure-P1 to this application.2. Registered office of the transferee company is situated within the National Capital Territory of Delhi. Along with the application copy of the Articles and Memorandum of Association and audited balance sheets of the transferee company has been placed on record. Resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the transferee company approving the proposed scheme of arrangement and restructuring has also been placed on record. In the application details with regard to the date of incorporation of the transferee company, their authorized, subscribed, issued and paid up share capital have been stated. It is st...
Tag this Judgment!Firefly E-ventures Limited Vs. Ht Media Limited
Court: Delhi
This application under Sections 391 to 394 read with Sections 100- 104 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act for short) has been filed by Firefly e-Ventures Limited (Transferor Company for short) in respect of the scheme of arrangement and restructuring between the transferor company and HT Media Limited (Transferee Company for short). Copy of the scheme has been enclosed as annexure-P1 to this application.2. Registered office of the transferor company is situated within the National Capital Territory of Delhi. Along with the application copy of the Articles and Memorandum of Association and the latest audited balance sheet of the transferor company has been placed on record. Resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the transferor company approving the proposed scheme of arrangement and restructuring has also been placed on record. In the application details with regard to the date of incorporation of the transferor company, their authorized, subscribed, issued and paid up share capita...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Projects Private Limited Vs. Dbh International Private Limited
Court: Delhi
This joint application under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act for short) has been filed by Bharat Projects Private Limited (Transferor Company for short) and DBH International Private Limited (Transferee Company) in respect of scheme of amalgamation appended as Annexure-A to this application.2. The registered offices of the transferor and transferee companies are situated within the National Capital Territory of Delhi. Along with the application, copy of the Articles and Memorandum of Association and latest audited balance sheets of the transferee and transferor companies have been placed on record. Resolutions passed by the Board of Directors of the transferor and transferee companies approving the proposed scheme have also been placed on record. In the application details with regard to the date of incorporation of the transferor and transferee company, their authorized, subscribed, issued and paid up share capital have been stated.3. The transferor company has 6 shar...
Tag this Judgment!New Vikas Cooperative Industrial Society Ltd and anr. Vs. Union of Ind ...
Court: Delhi
1. This writ petition filed on 14th November 1991, seeks a mandamus directing the Commissioner of Industries, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi ('GNCTD') to clear the claim of the Petitioner society relating to grant of rebate on sales of handloom clothes in terms of the policies dated 17th June 1983 and 21st October 1983.2. The Petitioner states that it is a society engaged in the manufacture of handloom cloth. It sells its products through retail outlets by organizing exhibitions and expositions. The Government of India on 17th June 1983 announced a scheme granting special rebate on the sales of handloom cloth for the year 1983-84. Among the conditions for the grant of rebate was that the rebate would be within a ceiling of 20% and will be applicable only to sales of handloom cloth made at retail outlets of apex expositions of weaver cooperatives or State Handloom Development Corporations. The Central Governments share of the rebate on retail sales would be limited to...
Tag this Judgment!Dushyant Verma Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
1. This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C has been made by the petitioner for grant of bail. The petitioner/ applicant sought interim bail for appearing in different examinations and gave a schedule which is as under:a. MAT exam on 05.12.10b. IELTS exam on 11.12.10c. SNAP exam on 19.12.10d. XAT exam on 1st week of January 2011.e. FMS exam in 2nd week of January, 2011.2. The applicant had earlier moved an application on 20th October 2010 for appearing in CAT examination to be held on 29th October 2010. The applicant stated that during January 2011, there will be series of interviews for which the petitioner required to take part in. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner similar reliefs on different occasions were granted to the petitioner during month of January to February 2010 by this court and the Sessions Court. Therefore, he be granted relief for year 2010-2011 also and he be granted reliefs for appearing in different examinations.3. The applicant/ petitioner had ear...
Tag this Judgment!Jindal Earthmovers Private Limited . Vs. Jindal Infrastructure Private ...
Court: Delhi
1. These two applications under Sections 391, 392 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act, for short) have been filed by Jindal Earthmovers Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the transferor company) and Jindal Infrastructure Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the transferee company) in respect of scheme of amalgamation, which has been enclosed with the applications.2. The registered office of the transferor company and the transferee company are located within the National Capital Territory of Delhi.3. Along with the applications, the transferor company and the transferee company have filed copy of their Memorandum and Articles of Association, their audited balance sheets as well as Resolutions passed by the Board of Directors approving the proposed scheme of amalgamation.4. The transferor company has 11 shareholders as per the list given at page 249, who have given their consent/no objection certificates, which have been enclosed at pages 252 to 261 of C.A. (M) No. 2...
Tag this Judgment!Syndicate Bank Vs. Bank of Baroda and anr.
Court: Delhi
1. The challenge by means of the present appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is by one of the defendants, namely M/s Syndicate Bank, which has been held jointly and severely liable with the defendant no.1/Bank of Baroda/respondent no.1 under the money decree to the respondent no.2/plaintiff.2. The facts of the case are that respondent no.2/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs.32,865.30 along with interest at 12% per annum on the ground that there have been fraudulent withdrawals from his saving bank account by four entries, of which two were major, being through encashment of cheques of Rs.9,000/- and 15,000/-, both dated 6.10.1978 and the other two entries of Rs.4000/- and Rs.1000/- being through self cheques dated 7.10.1978 and 9.10.1978. The respondent no.2/plaintiff contended that all his transactions in the saving bank account prior to the disputed entries were through withdrawal slips and he never asked for or got issued any cheque book with re...
Tag this Judgment!