Delhi Court November 2012 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.
Rishabh Malhotra Vs. University of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
47-48. $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5394/2012 % Judgment Delivered on:30. 11.2012 RISHABH MALHOTRA ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Rishi Kapoor and Mr.Mukesh Kumar, Advs. along with the petitioner. versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr.Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. + W.P.(C) 5400/2012 PUSHPENDER Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.Shantanu Kumar, Adv. versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI THROOUGH VICE CHANCELLOR AND ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr.Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM 11004/2012 IN W.P.(C) 5394/2012 CM 11012/2012 IN W.P.(C) 5400/2012 1. Since the basic facts in the present writ petitions are common, the applications for interim relief are being heard together and disposed of by a common order.2. The necessary facts, to be noticed for disposal of the present applications, are that the petitioners had appeared in the graduation examination conducted by the University of Delhi through t...
Dr. Alka Gupta Vs. Medical Council of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on:11. 09.2012 Judgment delivered on:30. 11.2012 + WP(C) No.5677/2012 & CM No. 11629/2012 DR. ALKA GUPTA ...... Petitioner Vs MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Anil Goel & Mr Rajeev Kumar, Advocates. For the Respondent : Mr Amit Kumar & Mr Ashish Kumar, Advocates CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J 1.This is a writ petition which is directed against the order dated 15.05.2012 passed in Appeal no.597/2010 by respondent no.1 i.e., the Medical Council of India (hereinafter referred to in short as MCI). The impugned order passed by MCI is an interlocutory order whereby, on an application filed by the petitioner challenging its jurisdiction, it took the view that it had the jurisdiction to hear the matter on merits.2. The judgment in this matter was reserved at the notice stage itself. MCI which had advance notice of the writ petition...
M/S Cinergy Corporation Pte. Ltd. Vs. M/S National Agricultural Co-ope ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
19. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:30. 11.2012 FAO(OS) 572/2012 M/s Cinergy Corporation PTE. Ltd. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. D.K. Agarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Suryakant Singla and Ms.Shagun Bhatnagar, Advocates versus M/s National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. ..... Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.C.M. No. 19921/2012 (exemption) Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. FAO(OS) No. 572/2012 1. The appellant by the present appeal seeks to assail the common order passed by the learned Single Judge in O.M.P. No. No. 389/2006 and 243/2008. The appellant- Cinergy Corporation PTE. Ltd. preferred a petition, being O.M.P. No. 389/2006, under Sections 47 and 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) to seek enforcement of the Foreign First Tier Arbitration Award No. 3906 dated 11.04.2005 (the First Tier Arbitration ...
Hamidur Rehman Vs. Jamia Millia Islamia and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:9. h November, 2012. Pronounced on:30. h November, 2012 % + LPA No. 688/2012 HAMIDUR REHMAN Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Sitab Ali Choudhary, Adv. Versus JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Raju Ramachandran, Sr. Adv. with Mr.M.A. Siddiqui, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW D. MURUGESAN, CHIEF JUSTICE 1 The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant. The appellant applied for admission on 7.5.2012 to MA (Persian) Course in the respondent Jamia Millia Islamia University (hereinafter referred to as the respondent university) for the academic session 2012-2014. He secured 85 marks in written examination and 15 marks in the interview. As against 30 seats, the respondent university received 35 applications including that of the appellant. The appellant, on the basis of the marks, was placed in 21st ran...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Uk Bose
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:30. h November, 2012 + ITA 258/2010 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus UK BOSE Through: + + ..... Respondent Mr. Percy J.Pardiwalla, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Satyen Sethi and Mr. Arta Trana Panda, Advocates. ITA 546/2010 ITA 942/2010 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL I NEW DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus J B ROY Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Percy J.Pardiwalla, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Satyen Sethi and Mr. Arta Trana Panda, Advocates. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR,J: (OPEN COURT) The common question of law which arises in all the three appeals by the revenue relates to the assessment of the perquisites in the hands of the respective assessees. In ITA No.942/2010 the substantial question of law is as under:(i) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in deleting ...
M/S Mfar Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Director General(Married Accommod ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 123/2012 M/S MFAR CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Indu Malhotra, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Mahalakshmi Pavani, Mr. G. Balaji, Mr. Vanshdeep Dalmia and Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, Advocates. versus DIRECTOR GENERAL (Married Accommodation Project) Through: % ..... Respondent Mr. Anuj Agarwal with Mr. Gaurav Khanna, Advocates. Date of Decision : November 30, 2012 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL JUDGMENT : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.1. The abovementioned petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying for the appointment of a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate on the arbitrable disputes, which have arisen between the petitioner and the respondent.2. The aforesaid disputes, which have arisen between the petitioner and the respondent relate to a Work Order bearing No. 0012/GPR/BHUB/Contractors/Pkg-14/03 dated 27.07.2010 for the construction of 897 dwelling units at Bhubanesw...
Anshu Soni and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3654/2012 Decided on 30th November, 2012 ANSHU SONI & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Pallav Mongia, Adv. with petitioner no. 1 in person. versus STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Fizani Hussain, APP. Mr. Sandeep Khatri and Mr. Rajat Bhardwaj, Advs. for R-2 with Ms. Kavita Gera daughter of respondent no.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K. PATHAK, J.(ORAL) 1. By this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Code, for short), petitioners seeks quashing of FIR No. 343/2012 under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar, in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties before the Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.2. It emerges from the records that the FIR was registered against the petitioner no1 and his relatives, that is, petitioner nos. 2 to 7, on the com...
intercontinental Consultants and Technorats Pvt. L Vs. U.O.i. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:1. t November, 2012 Date of Decision:30. h November, 2012 % + W.P. (C) 6370/2008 INTERCONTINENTAL CONSULTANTS AND TECHNORATS PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. J.K. Mittal, Mr. Arun Gulati and Mr. V. K. Jha, Advocate. versus U.O.I. & ANR. Through: ......Respondents Ms. Sonia Sharma and Mr. V. C. Jha, Advocates. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR, J.: In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the constitutional validity of Rule 5 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 to the extent it includes re-imbursement of expenses in the value of taxable services for the purposes of levy of service tax. The petitioner also contends, in the alternative that the said rule is ultra vires of the provisions of Section 66 and 67 of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994.2. The petitioner is a company providing consulting engineering services. It specialises in highways, structures, airports...
intel Corporation Vs. Mr. theva Murugan and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1561/2009 & I.A.No.7966/2011 Date of Decision:30. h November, 2012 IN THE MATTER OF INTEL CORPORATION ..... Plaintiff Through : Mr. Manav Kumar, Advocate versus MR. THEVA MURUGAN & ORS ..... Defendants Through : None. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit praying inter alia for grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringing its trademark, for passing off, delivery up, damages, etc.2. The plaintiff is a company incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is engaged in the business of developing advanced integrated digital technology communication industries. platform for the computing and The plaintiff is aggrieved by the use of a deceptively similar mark as its trademark INTEL by the defendants in their trade name INTEL EXPRESS CARGO and INTEL IMPEX.3. Counsel for the plaintiff submits that the defendants are engaged in the busine...
New India Asurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shalini Upadhyay and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
$ 14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:30. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 299/2012 NEW INDIA ASURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate. Versus SHALINI UPADHYAY & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate for the Respondents No.1 & 2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appeal is for reduction of compensation of `15,30,944/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) in favour of the Respondents No.1 and 2 for the death of their mother Smt. Vimla Devi who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 17.12.2008.2. The finding on negligence has not been challenged by the Appellant Insurance Company; thus the same has attained finality.3. It is admitted case of the parties that deceased Vimla Devi, at the time of the accident, was aged 54 years. She was working as a UDC in Delhi Milk Scheme(DMS). It was proved on record that she was earning `17,11...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »