Delhi Court November 2011 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.
Chand Mohammed at Anish Ahmed and ors Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
1. The present appeal is filed against judgment dated 11.09.2007 passed in Sessions Case No. 16/2006 by the learned Addl Sessions Judge-I, North-East/Karkardooma Courts, Delhi arising out of FIR No. 129/2004 P.S. Welcome under Section 302/34 IPC whereby all the three appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 IPC. The appeal is also directed against the order of sentence dated 15.09.2009 whereby all the three appellants have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of ` 500/- each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for one week each.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 19.04.2004 at 4.05 a.m. DD No. 28A Ex. PW15/A was got recorded at Police Station Welcome on receiving information from Wireless Operator of P.S. Welcome to the effect that a quarrel had taken place at WP-17, Baghwali Masjid. The same was marked to ASI Lal Chand PW-9. PW20 Inspector Anand Sagar along with PW9 ASI Lal Chand and PW12 Constable Dharmender reached ...
Govt. of Nct of Delhi Vs. Sanjay Grover and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
1. Both petitions impugn the order dated 1st July, 2009 of the Additional District Judge allowing the appeal preferred by Sh. Sanjay Grover under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as applicable to Delhi and setting aside the order dated 19th August, 2008 of the Collector of Stamps, Delhi. Notices of the petitions were issued. Pleadings have been completed and the counsels have been heard.2. The controversy concerns a Gift Deed registered on 1 st May, 2006. Vide the said Gift Deed Sh. Chander Bhan Grover who was the father of the Ms. Seema Grover Seth and Sh. Sanjay Grover gifted industrial plot admeasuring 383.4 sq. yards of freehold land in the industrial area of Village Naraina, Delhi together with two and half storeyed construction thereon to Sh. Sanjay Grover. The property subject matter of gift was valued in the said deed at `19 lacs and the Gift Deed was executed on Non-Judicial Stamp Paper of `1,52,000/-. Sh. Chander Bhan Grover died shortly thereafter on 6th September,...
Ms.Nicco Corporation Ltd. Vs. Ms.S.N.Nandy and Co.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
1. Vide impugned judgment dated 23.2.2011, plaintiff's suit for recovery of `92,20,562/- against the defendant has been decreed in sum of `2,72,078.94 with proportionate cost, pendente-lite and future interest @12% per annum.2. As per the averments in the plaint, the plaintiff 'M/s.S.N.Nandy & Co.' had offered to execute works on turnkey basis as per the requirement of the defendant/appellant and that the various items of work to be executed were listed as per Ex.PW-1/51 at a total price of `2,87,30,333/- and that during execution of the works, vide Ex.DW-1/P1 extra items were agreed to be executed at the rate specified therein.3. Alleging that for the extra work done the plaintiff was entitled to `92,20,562/-, the suit was filed.4. The appellant/defendant denied any extra work.5. Thus, the main issue between the parties was whether the plaintiff had executed extra work not covered by the original letter of intent dated 15.10.1992, Ex.PW-1/6 and as detailed in Ex.PW-1/51.6. In para...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi Vs. Eon Technology P. Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
1. Revenue in the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (Act, for short) has raised the following substantial question of law:-"Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in upholding the order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs.33,36,068/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?"2. The respondent assessee EON Technology Pvt. Ltd. is a private limited company engaged in business of development and export of 6 software. During the relevant assessment year 2007-08, the assessee had paid commission of Rs.33,36,068/- to its parent/holding company EON Technologies, U.K., (ETUK, for short) on the sales and amounts realized on export contracts procured by ETUK for the respondent assessee. There is no dispute about the nature and on what account commission has been paid. The quantum etc. and the fact that ETUK was entitled to said payment is not doubted or disputed.3. The contention and question raised by the Revenu...
Fashion Television India Private Limited Vs. Ftv Bvi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
1. Aggrieved by an order dated 20th October 2011 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Act'), the Fashion Television India Private Limited (hereinafter 'the Appellant') has filed Arbitration Appeal No. 14 of 2011 against the Respondent FTV BVI under Section 37(2)(b) of the Act. The Appellant has also filed O.M.P. No. 809 of 2011 under Section 9 of the Act for directions to the Respondent to comply with the Memorandum of Agreement (`MOA') dated 9th August 2001 with the Petitioner and not act in furtherance of an Agreement dated 19th April 2011 between the Respondent and Media Network of Distribution (India) Ltd. without first giving an opportunity to the Appellant in terms of Clause 21 of the MoA dated 9th August 2001.2. Since both the appeal and the petition arise out of the same facts between the same parties, they have, with the consent of the parties, been heard together.3. Modi Entertainment Network Ltd. ('MEN') and the Res...
Komal Sethi Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
1. The present petitions challenge the order dated 13 th October, 2011 whereby the Petitioner Kapil Sethi was granted anticipatory bail subject to certain conditions. The grievance of the Petitioner Kapil Sethi is that while granting anticipatory bail, he has been directed to fulfill the onerous condition of placing on record the FDR in the sum of Rs. 15 lakhs in the name of the learned District and Sessions Judge, subject to the final outcome of the cases qua the claim of the Complainant about her jewellary articles being in custody of Kapil Sethi.2. The grievance of the Petitioner Komal Sethi, the Complainant against the impugned order is that by the impugned order Kapil Sethi has been permitted to travel to USA because of which he is likely to flee from justice which would cause irreparable damage to the process of law underway between the two Petitioners in the different proceedings going on before different Courts.3. Briefly the facts leading to passing of the impugned order are t...
T.M.Sampath Vs. Secy Ministry of Water Resources and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
1. The appellant who otherwise has no concern with the post of Director (Finance) under R-2 filed a writ petition seeking writ of quo warranto to quash appointment of R-3 as Director (Finance). Vide impugned order dated 23.8.2011, review whereof has been declined vide order dated 9.9.2011, learned Single Judge has held that the appellant has no locus standi to maintain the writ petition holding that the law declared by the Division Bench of this Court in the judgment reported as 128 (2006) DLT 337 Dr.Devender Gupta Vs. UOI binds him. The learned Single Judge has held that the petitioner was a stranger and had no concern as to who was appointed as a Director (Finance) by R-2.2. The decision passed by the Division Bench which has been relied upon by the learned Single Judge does not hold as observed by the learned Single Judge. The decision recognizes that for a writ of quo warranto the strict rules of locus standi are not strictly applicable as was observed by the Supreme Court in the d...
Superhouse Leathers Limited Vs. Rana Pratap Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
1. By this common order two applications, one of which is filed on behalf of petitioner-management(being C.M. No. 2174/2011) under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for a direction to HDFC Bank to produce the records relating to the grant of vehicle loan to respondent no.1-workman(who shall hereinafter be referred to as 'the workman') to show that he was gainfully employed during the relevant period and the other application(being C.M. No. 7206/2006) is by the workman under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1957(in short 'the Act'), are being disposed of.2. The workman had raised an industrial dispute that his services were terminated illegally on 05.08.1994 by his employer M/s Super Garments Limited, of which Company the petitioner claims to be the successor-in- interest. That dispute was referred to the labour court where the reference was registered as I.D.No. 220/96. The labour court decided the reference in favour of the workman vide award dated 10.09.2001 and ...
Rajesh Kumar Meena Vs. Commissioner of Police, Delhi and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
(Oral) Mrs. Manjulika Gautam, Member (A) : 1. Despite the case being called twice, there is no appearance on behalf of the applicant. It seems that the applicant has lost interest in pursuing the matter. The OA is dismissed in default and for non-prosecution....
Digam Singh Vs. J.P. Singh, Secretary, New Delhi and Another
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2011
DR. A.K. MISHRA, MEMBER (A) 1. This Contempt Petition has been filed against the respondents alleging disobedience of the Tribunal’s order dated 24.04.2001 passed in OA-2235/1999. For better appreciation the appropriate direction of the Tribunal of 24.04.2001 is extracted below:- “7.We accordingly do so with a direction to the respondents to pay the applicants pay and allowances, at par with regular employees w.e.f. March, 2000, when similarly situated persons have been granted the benefit of “equal pay for equal work”. Necessary action in this regard along with the arrears of pay due to the applicants shall be taken within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 2. It is stated by the petitioner that the he had never been paid pay and allowances at par with regular employees, neither any annual increment has been given to him so far (vide para-4 of CP). The petitioner had filed OA-1566/2003 claiming regularization of his contract ser...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »