Delhi Court June 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.
Premier Hockey Development Private Ltd. Vs. Indian Hockey Federation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. Original Miscellaneous Petition No.52/2011 has been preferred by the petitioner-Premier Hockey Development Private Limited (PHDPL) [earlier known as Indian Hockey Development Private Limited (IHDPL)] to seek restraints against Indian Hockey Federation (IHF), which is a registered society formed to promote, encourage, develop and maintain general control over field hockey in India, from creating any third party interest in relation to the rights granted to the petitioner under Clause 3.2 of an agreement entered into between the IHF and the petitioner known as the "Sanction Agreement" dated 31.12.2004, and violating various clauses of the said Sanction Agreement. The petitioner also seeks a restraint against the respondent from taking steps which would tantamount to revocation, impediment, detraction from, or devaluation of the sanction granted in favour of the petitioner under Sanction Agreement till the disputes are resolved through arbitration. The petitioner also seeks a restraint...
Baker Oil Tools(India) Pvt.Ltd. and anr. Vs. Baker Hughes Ltd.and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-03-2011
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2. To be referred to Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes 1. This is an appeal filed under section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to challenge the judgment and decree dated 16.9.2004 passed by the learned ADJ whereby the suits filed by the respondents herein for specific performance, permanent injunction and damages were decreed in favour of the respondents and against the appellants. 2. The short point involved for adjudication at this juncture is on the preliminary issue of maintainability of the suits and thus this judgment only deals with the said issue, without having any bearing on the merits of the matter. 3. Challenging the maintainability of the suits, Mr.Chetan Sharma, learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the trial court has wrongly decided the issue no.1 in favour of the respondents. Mr. Sharma further submitted...
Delhi Development Authority Vs. Ram Kumar Aggarwal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-03-2011
1. CM No. 11419/2011 (for condonation of delay) This intra court appeal filed by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA, for short) is delayed by 227 days. In this application for condonation of delay it is stated that the delay has been caused due to bureaucratic working and is neither intentional nor deliberate. 2. Before issuing notice on the application for condonation of delay, we have thought it appropriate to examine the merits of the case. 3. The respondent had applied for and was registered for allotment of Lower Income Group flat (LIG Flat) under the New Housing Pattern Scheme, 1979. He was assigned registration No. 1927 and priority No. 31908. After delay of 30 years, the respondent was issued demand-cum-allotment letter having block dates 05.03.2009 12.03.2009 stating, inter-alia, that he had been allotted an LIG flat in Rohini in the draws held on 22.9.2007 at the price of Rs.7,43,475.10. The price included interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of allotment till the date of matu...
Jitender @ Jitu Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-03-2011
1. The present application under Section 7-A of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) has been filed on behalf of the appellant Jitender @ Jitu claiming that he was a juvenile in conflict with law as defined in Section 2(l) of the said Act on the date of commission of the alleged offence, which was 19.08.2004. In short, the appellant contends that he was below the age of 18 years on the date of the incident and that he should be given the benefit of the provisions of the said Act. 2. By an order passed by the predecessor Bench on 26.11.2010, the Registrar Appellate (Judicial) was directed to conduct an enquiry as to whether the appellant was a juvenile on the date of the alleged commission of offence. This direction was given after the said Bench had noted that the date of birth of the appellant, as given in the family register of the appellant maintained by the Gram Panchayat, Manikpur, Block Achhaldha, Tehsil Vidhun...
Comissioner of Income Tax Vs. Eastern Medikit Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-03-2011
1. This appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law in annulling the order of the CIT passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT has erred in law in holding that the assessee is entitled for deduction under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act for the present assessment year i.e. 2005-06? 3. Whether the ITAT could go into the merits of the disputes, while examining the validity of the order passed by the CIT under Section 263 of the Act, when CIT had remitted the case back to the AO for determining the issue on the ground that in the assessment order this aspect was not considered by the AO?" 2. Learned counsel for the parties were ready to argue the matter, immediately after the admission. The arguments were heard on the aforesaid questions of law and orders reserved. By this judgment, we proceed to answer the afo...
ifci Ltd. Vs. Commercial Taxes Officer and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-03-2011
1. The petitioner seeks to raise a question of law as to whether by virtue of the deeming provisions contained in Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (the CST Act for short), there is any first charge on the property of the dealer. The petitioner being a financial institution holding a decree against the dealer claims absence of such first charge in view of there being no specific provision in the CST Act though the petitioner does not dispute such first charge in respect of the amount due under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 (the RST Act for short). 2. The petitioner is a public financial institution incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 which had advanced loan facilities to M/s West Indian Gas Products Limited guaranteed by certain guarantors. The said entity also took loans from other banks and financial institutions, but failed to maintain financial discipline. The petitioner along with ICICI filed an OA before the DRT, Jaipur and in those proceedings a recovery...
Ravi Raj Gupta and anr. Vs. M/S Hansraj Gupta and Co. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-03-2011
1. The present appeal lays a challenge to an order dated 17th February, 2009 whereby the learned Single Judge has held that the suit filed by the plaintiffs is not maintainable being frivolous and dismissed the same with costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid to the defendants equally. 2. The facts giving rise to the suit are in a narrow compass. CS (OS) No.1944/2003 was filed on or about 10th November, 2003 by the appellants seeking the following prayers:- "(a) Issue an order of permanent injunction in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendants herein restraining the Defendants from acting upon the Board Resolution dated 12/01/02. (b) issue an order of permanent injunction restraining the Defendants 2-4 from dispossessing the Plaintiffs from the said premises. (c) issue an order of permanent injunction restraining Defendant No.5 from taking any steps pursuant to any directions issued by the Defendants in accordance to the said Board Resolution to the said premises; (d) A declaration...
Greaves Cotton Limited Vs. Mr. Mohammad Rafi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-03-2011
1. This is a suit for permanent & mandatory injunction, damages, rendition of accounts and delivering up of infringing material. The plaintiff company is engaged in the manufacture of a wide range of industrial products including diesel engines, generating sets, agro equipments, construction equipments and road construction equipments. It is claimed that the word/mark GREAVES is an essential and prominent feature of plaintiffs trade name, corporate name and business style and the trademark GREAVES is the surname of the founder of the plaintiffs predecessor GREAVES COTTON AND COMPANY LIMITED. Other groups companies of the plaintiff are Greaves Leasing Finance Limited, Greaves Midwest Engineering Company Limited, Crompton Greaves Limited, Dee Greaves Limited, Piaggio Greaves Vehicles Limited and Greaves Farymann Diesel GMBH. It is also alleged that GREAVES is the principal trademark of the plaintiff company and is exclusively associated with the products, business and activities of t...
M/S. Mohan Hotel P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-03-2011
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment Yes 2. To be referred to Reporters or not Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest Yes 1. This is a reference made on behalf of the assessee. The captioned reference pertains to the assessment years 1984-1985 to 1989-1990. The Appellate Tribunal, Sales Tax, Delhi (hereinafter, referred to as the Tribunal) has referred to this court, for adjudication, the following questions of law :- "(i). Whether on the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the delivery order issued by the dealer is not a document of title and therefore, the case of the appellant does not fall under the second limb of section 5(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956? (ii). Whether on the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct to hold that the second limb of the aforesaid section 5(1) pre-supposes foreign destination of the goods? (iii). If the...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shri Mukesh Luthra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-03-2011
1. On 18.05.2001, ITA No.1115 of 2009 was admitted on the following substantial question of law: "Whether order passed by ITAT is perverse in law and on facts when it deleted the addition of `92,29,561/- ignoring the material fact that said concern was a dummy concern and that the money was reflected in the regular books of accounts though found during the course of search and therefore, the addition could be made only in the regular assessment." 2. The question of law in ITA No.1112 of 2009 is the same except the quantum of addition. 3. As the counsel for the parties were ready to argue the matter finally at that stage itself, the hearing also took place immediately after the admission of the appeal. The counsel for the parties took time to file the written submissions which have been filed as well. The dispute which has given rise to the aforesaid substantial question of law can be traced from the following events. A search was carried in the case of the assessee on 30.08.2001. The a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »