Delhi Court November 2012 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.
Capt. Dharambir Singh Dabas Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : October 30, 2012 Judgment Pronounced on : November 19 , 2012 + W.P. (C) No.5973/1999 CAPT. DHARAMBIR SINGH DABAS ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.H.S.Dahiya, Advocate with Ms.Anita Singh, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.R.Nischal, Advocate with Ms.Archana Gaur, Advocate for UOI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The factual matrix leading to the filing of the above captioned petition is that on May 17, 1995 the petitioner, an ex-serviceman, having rendered 5 years service in the Indian Army, was offered appointment as Assistant Commandant in Central Industrial Security Force. As per the letter of appointment he was on probation for two years.2. The petitioner was posted at CISF Unit BCCL Dhanbad. His subordinate officer named SI/Exe.A.K.Marandi was caught red-handed accepting illegal gratification in sum of `10,000/-....
Maruti Countrywide Auto Financial Services Pvt. Lt Vs. --------------- ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:19.11.2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY APPLICATION (M) NO. 177 OF 201.In the matter of Companies Act, 1956 (Act No. 1 of 1956) AND In the matter of Scheme of Amalgamation under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956 read with Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 AND In the matter of: The Scheme of Amalgamation of 1. Maruti Countrywide Auto Financial Services Private Limited (Transferor Company or Applicant Company No.1) and its respective shareholders and creditors 2. GE Money Financial Services Private Limited (Transferee Company or Applicant Company No.2) and its respective shareholders and creditors Through: C.A(M) No.177/2012 Mr. Sharan Dev Singh Thakur, Advocate; Mr. Sidhartha Barua, Advocate; Mr. Bharat Apte, Advocate Page 1 of 10 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) 1. These are first motion applications under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Vijender Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
$~ R-87 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:19. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 503/2005 U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Appellant Through Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Advocate for Ms. Garima Prashad, Advocate versus VIJENDER KUMAR & ORS. Through None ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appellant U.P. State Road Transport Corporation(U.P.S.R.T.C.) impugns a judgment dated 21.07.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of `56,721/- was awarded in favour of the First Respondent for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 03.08.1998.2. The sole ground urged in the Appeal is that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of UPSRTC bus not UP-14-8217 and the negligence was on the part of the driver of truck not DL-1L-4587 in which the First Respondent was working as a cleaner and was travelling at the time of the acciden...
Chhanga Mal Gupta Vs. Uoi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on : October 31, 2012 Judgment Pronounced on: November 19, 2012 + RFA(OS) 9/2011 CHHANGA MAL GUPTA ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.R.L.Kohli, Advocate. versus UOI & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Jaswinder Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and having perused the evidence, as recorded in the order dated September 26, 2012, we had deferred further hearing of the matter for a period of four weeks and it was indicated in the cause list that the matter would not be taken up till October 19, 2012. The reason was to enable the respondents to consider whether they would be willing to surrender the tenanted premises within a reasonable time for the reason a Post Office i.e. a Public Utility Service was being run from the premises in question and a sudden disruption thereof would put ...
Cit(Central-i) Vs. M/S.Dalmia Cement(Bharat) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:19. 11.2012 + ITR 121/1997 CIT(CENTRAL-I) ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Abhishek Maratha, sr. standing counsel with Ms. Anshul Sharma, Advocate. versus M/S.DALMIA CEMENT(BHARAT) LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Sh. R.M. Mehta with Ms. Yogita Sunaria, Advocates. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR, J : (OPEN COURT) This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) relating to the assessment year 1985-86 for which the previous year ended on 31.3.1985. The assessee is a public limited company deriving income from the following units. i) ii) iii) iv) v) 2. Cement Division at Dalmiapuram Dalmia Magnesite Corporation at Salem Dalmia International at Hospet Govan Travels with Head Officer at New Delhi Dalmia Electronics Corporation at Ballabhgarh The questions of law referred by the Tribunal to this Court for opinion are as follows : (1) (2) Whether on facts ...
Darshan Lal Chowdhary Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : October 31, 2012 Judgment Pronounced on : November 19, 2012 + W.P. (C) No.5182/2012 DARSHAN LAL CHOWDHARY Petitioner Represented by: Ms.Jyoti Singh, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Sanjeev Chaswal, Ms.Saahila Lamba, and Mr.Amandeep Joshi, Advocates. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Anjana Gosain, Advocate. W.P. (C) No.5303/2012 V.S.S. GOUDAR Petitioner Represented by: Ms.Jyoti Singh, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Sanjeev Chaswal, Ms.Saahila Lamba, and Mr.Amandeep Joshi, Advocates. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Anjana Gosain, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The facts leading to the filing of the above captioned petitions are that in the year 1974 the petitioners of the two writ petitions were commissioned in the Indian Army in the rank of Second Lieutenant and got prom...
New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Rama Shanker and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:19. h November, 2012 + MAC.APP. 243/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ...... Appellant Through: Mr. Shekhar Aggarwal, Adv. for Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Adv. versus RAMA SHANKER & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sunil K. Kalra, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appeal is for reduction of compensation of `11,80,960/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of Respondents No.1 to 5 for the death of Smt. Sunita, who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 05.04.2011.2. The finding on negligence reached by the Claims Tribunal is not challenged by the Appellant Insurance Company. Thus, the same has attained finality.3. During inquiry before the Claims Tribunal it was claimed that Smt. Sunita was running a kirana shop and was earning `10,000/- per month. In the absence of any cogent evidence with regard to the deceaseds income, the Cl...
Sada Nand Choudhary Vs. Wanti Devi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:19. 11.2012 + FAO 117/2010 SADA NAND CHOUDHARY Through : ..... Appellant Mr. Sanjay Agnihotri, Adv. versus WANTI DEVI & ORS Through : ..... Respondents Mr. Mohit Chaudhary with Ms. Rashi Bansal, Advs. for R-1. Mr. Irfan Ahmed, Adv. for R-6. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.FAO 117/2010 1. Present is an appeal under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the impugned judgment dated 04.01.2010 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Delhi whereby the petition of respondent no. 1 herein i.e. Wanti Devi for grant of probate has been allowed.2. The appellant and the respondents herein are real brothers and sisters being the sons and daughters of late Sh. Asa Nand Choudhary. The respondent no. 1 herein i.e. petitioner before the learned trial court had filed a petition under Section 276 of the Act seeking probate of the will dated 19.07.1991 allegedly exe...
M/S National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Phool Devi and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:19. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 262/2011 M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. D. K. Sharma, Advocate versus PHOOL DEVI & OTHERS Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Sumeet Gabha, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 8 & 9. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appellant National Insurance Company Limited takes exception to a judgment dated 15.01.2011 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) solely on the ground that while awarding a compensation of ` 2,23,040/- in favour of the Respondents No. 1 to 7, the Appellant was made liable to pay the compensation, in spite of the fact that Respondent No.8, driver of the TSR not DL-1RC-0720, possessed a driving licence to drive only LMV (NT) and a motorcycle and was not competent to drive a transport vehicle (commercial). Thus, the Appellant was entitled to recovery rights.2. The learned counsel for the Appellant conte...
Daya Kishan Vs. Rakesh Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-19-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:19. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 366/2009 DAYA KISHAN Through ..... Appellant Mr.S.N.Parashar, Advocate versus RAKESH KUMAR & ORS. Through ..... Respondents Mr.D.K.Sharma, Advocate for R-3 Insurance Company CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) C.M. APPL No.10511/2009 There is a delay of 70 days in filing the Appeal. For the reasons as stated in the application, the delay in filing the Appeal is condoned. The Application stands disposed of. MAC. APP. 366/2009 1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of ` 3,25,000/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of the Appellant Daya Kishan, who suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident, which occurred on 28.11.2003.2. During the course of hearing two contentions are raised on behalf of the learned counsel for the Appellant:(i) It is stated that the Appellant suffered disability to the extent of 54% in re...
- ‹ Prev
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- Next ›
- Last »