Delhi Court May 2011 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Airports Authority of India Vs. Delhi Cantonment Board
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2011
1. The challenge by the Petitioner, Airports Authority of India (AAI), is to an assessment order dated 24th February 2003 passed by the Respondent Delhi Cantonment Board (DCB) finalizing the annual property tax assessments for the years 1998-99 at Rs. 12,10,40,791/-, for 1999-2000 at Rs. 13,87,01,935/- and for 2000-2001 at Rs. 16,64,71,391/-. The petition also challenges a bill dated 24th February 2003 raised by the DCB calling upon AAI to pay Rs. 20,12,06,539/- as house tax under the Cantonments Act, 1924 (CA, 1924) for the period 1st April 1998 to 31st May 2002. 2. On 26th May 2003, this Court directed that subject to AAI depositing a sum of Rs. 51,00,000/-, the impugned demand for property tax would remain stayed. 3. AAI states that in the year 1940, 718.85 acres of land within the jurisdiction of the DCB comprising Terminal I-B and the domestic arrival buildings consisting of ground floor and mezzanine floor was purchased from the DCB for a sum of Rs. 4,61,95,600/-. This comprised ...
VipIn Kumar Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2011
1. Petitioner, Vipin Kumar, was appointed on ad-hoc basis as a substitute language teacher (Sanskrit) on 9.5.1994 by the Oak Grove School, Jharipani, Dehradun. 2. The school is established and maintained by the Northern Railway. 3. It was clearly indicated to him that his appointment on ad hoc basis would confer no right on him to be permanently absorbed as a permanent teacher. 4. Claiming that not much work was available, requiring a full-time language teacher in Sanskrit to be employed in the school and for the reason the teachers teaching Hindi had the requisite skill to teach Sanskrit, which we note is taught under the 3 language formula as 1 of the 3 languages which a student must study till he passes out from school and that Sanskrit as an option could be taken only up till Class VIII, petitioner was told that there was no work for him and rather than send him home, he was assigned duties to work in the hostel of the school where he has been working since July 1996. 5. Placing re...
M/S Pragati Construction Co. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2011
1. This is a reference filed under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the I.T. Act) against the judgment dated 24.01.1995 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal) pertaining to assessment year 1989-90. The question of law which has been referred to us for adjudication is as follows: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT has erred in law in disallowing the loss of Rs 31.05 lakhs claimed by the assessee as a trading loss in its business of purchase and sale of flats." 2. The aforementioned question of law arises in the background of the following facts which we have culled out from the orders of the authorities below: 2.1 The assessee at the relevant point in time, was carrying on the business of construction, purchase and sale of flats. It appears that the assessees sister concern, i.e., Pragati Construction Co. (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as PCL) had made a bid, in an auct...
M/S Roshan Lal Vohra and Sons Vs. M.C.D and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2011
1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs.20,22,600/-. The plaintiff was awarded work by the defendants vide letter dated 22.6.2005. The work was completed within the period stipulated in the agreement in this regard. Under the agreement, the plaintiff was entitled for payment of Running Bill in every month and Final Bill within six months from the date of completion. The eighth Running Bill passed by defendant No.2 who is the Executive Engineer of MCD was of Rs.15,07,607/- and the cheque amount of the aforesaid bill was Rs.14,29,299/-. However, against the said payment, the defendants paid only amount of Rs.1,85,020/- to the plaintiff. The balance of the Eighth Running Bill was not paid by the defendant on the ground that the funds were not available under the relevant head. The balance amount of the Running Bill was Rs.12,44,279/- The final bill, i.e., ninth bill was for Rs.1,71,773/- and was passed for payment of Rs.1,64,731/. The defendants, however, failed to make payment of the afores...
ihhr Hospitality Pvt Ltd Vs. Bestech India Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2011
1. This is a suit for permanent injunction. The plaintiff-company claims to be engaged in the ownership and management of Destination Spas, luxury business and leisure hotels in India and destinations around the world, including Mauritius and is providing services under the trade and service mark Ananda, which if claims to be its well-known mark in India and abroad. According to the plaintiff-company, the aforesaid mark was adopted by it way back in 1998 and it is registered in India under class 5 in respect of Ayurvedic and herbal preparations; class 30 in respect of breads, biscuits, cakes, pastries, confectioneries, sauces and spices; class 03 in respect of bath salts for toilets purposes; essential oils, shampoos, potpourri, herbs and herbal preparations; class 21 in respect of potteries, crockery and glassware; class 42 in respect of health resort, hotels and spa. The plaintiff-company is running a hotel and spa resort in the foothills of Himalayas under the name Ananda which attr...
Shanti Bhushan Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2011
1. This is a reference made to this court under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as I.T. Act) against the judgment dated 19.05.1994 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal). Accordingly, a statement of case was drawn up and the following question of law was referred, pursuant to order dated 08.09.1994 passed by this court :- "whether, on all facts and circumstances of the case, the expenses incurred by the assessee on coronary by-pass operation should have been allowed as a allowable deduction either under Section 31 or Section 37 of the I. T. Act, 1961?" 2. As is apparent from the questions of law extracted hereinabove by us, the issue raised in the captioned reference is both ingenious and novel. The question raised is the product of experience, deftness and obvious artfulness of the petitioner who is a seasoned, experienced and an eminent Advocate of the country. 3. What is at the heart of the matter, as a m...
Lokniti Foundation Vs. Uoi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2011
1. This writ petition has raised a serious issue which concerns the age of players in different categories who aspire to be playing under the banner of the Delhi and District Cricket Association (DDCA). The DDCA selects players in three categories:- (1) under 16; (2) under 19; and (3) under 22 years. 2. There have been a series of instances where the ages of the players have been found to be inaccurate and this leads to an unfair practice inasmuch as players who are above a particular age category manage to get themselves categorized in a lower age category and, obviously, because of their age advantage they are able to perform better. As an instance, if there is a 21 year old cricket player and he is able to get his age registered with the DDCA as being 18 years, he would be in a position to play in the under 19 category of tournaments and thereby he would have an advantage over other boys who are genuinely under the age of 19 years. 3. The requirement of creating a level playing fiel...
Pfizer Products Inc. and anr. Vs. B.P.Singh Tyagi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2011
1. This is a suit for grant of permanent injunction, rendition of accounts and damages. Plaintiff No. 1 is a wholly owned US subsidiary of Pfizer Inc., whereas plaintiff No.2 Pfizer Limited is the Indian Subsidiary of Pfizer Inc. Pfizer is a large multinational pharmaceutical company which enjoys a global reputation for the high quality and efficacy of its product. The research and development budged of Pfizer was estimated at about US$ 7.5 billion in the year 2004 and it manufactures a number of pharmaceuticals products, including vitamin, supplements, antibiotics and cardiovascular products. COREX is one of the top selling products of the plaintiff and is a highly sought after drug for treatment of cough and in allergic or infective conditions of the respiratory passage. This product is being sold in India since 1964 and the mark COREX is registered in India since 1963 in Class 5 vide Trademark No. 213825. The trade mark is owned by plaintiff No.1 Pfizer Product Inc. 2. Defendant No....
Surya NaraIn Tiwari Vs. M/S Samarth Shiksha Samiti Mata Leelawati Bali ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2011
1. The petitioner workman claims to have been employed as a School Bus Driver with the respondent School. An industrial dispute was raised by him and on which the following reference under Section 10 of the I.D. Act was made: "Whether Sh. Surya Narain Tiwari S/o Sh. Ram Sunder Tiwari left his job after receiving his full and final dues from the management and if not, whether his services have been terminated illegally and /or unjustifiably by the management and if so, to what sum of money as monetary relief along with other consequential benefits in terms of existing Laws/Govt. notifications and to what other relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect?" 2. The Industrial Adjudicator has vide award dated 1st July, 2010 held the petitioner workman to have left the services of the respondent employer on his own after taking full and final settlement and axiomatically disbelieved that the services of the petitioner workman were illegally terminated. Aggrieved t...
Hcl Technologies Limited Vs. Unique Identification Authority of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2011
1. This is a suit for grant of perpetual injunction. Defendant No.2 Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) which is stated to be an office attached to the Planning Commission, to issue, a unique identification number to all Indian residents invited Expression of Interest for appointment of Managed Service Provider (MSP) for Central ID Data Repository. Each participant in the tendering process was required to submit an Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) of Rs.2 crores in the form of bank guarantee in favour of defendant No.2. The EMD of unsuccessful applicants was to be returned to them within one month of issue of Request For Proposal (RFP) to the successful applicants. The EMD furnished by the successful applicants was to remain in force till RFP evaluation process was complete. The plaintiff, in compliance with the terms and conditions of the aforesaid tender submitted a bank guarantee of Rs.2 crores issued by defendant No.3 State Bank of India. The bank guarantee was extended fro...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »