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.
Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs. Hb Leasing and Finances Co.Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : October 18, 2012 Judgment Pronounced on : November 06, 2012 + RFA(OS) 110/2010 MAHAVIR SPINNING MILLS LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms.Malavika Rajkotia, Advocate and Mr.Chetanya Puri, Advocate versus HB LEASING AND FINANCES CO.LTD. ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.P.K.Mittal, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Briefly stated, the facts leading to filing of the above captioned appeal are that on May 29, 1992 the respondent company filed a suit for possession and recovery of a sum of `23,04,199/- against the appellant company on the original side of this Court.2. It was pleaded that the respondent company is engaged in the business of leasing machines and providing other financial services. On May 23, 1984 Mohta Industries Ltd. wrote a letter to the respondent company stating therein that the respondent company should purchase 1 Hydra...
Smt. Vidya Wati Sharma Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi, Through the Chief Se ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2012
(ORAL) Shri G. George Paracken: The applicant was initially appointed as a Nursery Teacher w.e.f. 07.08.1978 in the school run by the Department of Labour, Govt. of NCT of Delhi under Deputy Labour Officer (North East) Jhilmil. She retired from service on 31.07.2011 on completion of 60 years of age. 2. The Govt. of NCT of Delhi has taken a cabinet decision on 08.09.2006 to grant automatic re-employment to all the retiring teachers upto the PGT level till they attain the age of 62 years. The aforesaid decision was notified by the Directorate of Education vide Notification dated 29.01.2007 and now in the Directorate of Education teachers are working till the age of 62 years after enjoying the additional two years automatic re-employment. 3. Since the teachers working in schools under the Directorate of Social Welfare were not granted similar automatic re-employment, some of them have approached this Tribunal in OA 2317/2008 seeking a direction to the respondents to extend the same benefi...
M/S. Pushker Paint Industries Vs. C.C.E. Lucknow
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Nov-06-2012
Archana Wadhwa: The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of paints, which are being packed in drums. Their factory was visited by Central Excise officers on 23.11.09 and various checks and verifications were conducted. As a result, finished goods were found in excess as also some of the drums were found having not been entered in their RG 23A Part I records. The officers seized the same. 2. On the above basis, proceedings were initiated proposing confiscation of finished goods as also confiscation of drums for the packing material and for imposition of penalties. The original adjudicating authority confiscated the excess found goods as also drums with an option to the appellant to redeem the same and also imposed penalties. 3. However, on appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the confiscation of finished goods but uphold the confiscation of packing material i.e. drums as also imposition of penalty. 4. The appellants contention is that these drums were purchased as old and used...
Suresh Pehlwan @ Suresh Basoya and Another Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-2012
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J 1. These two appeals are being decided together as they are directed against the same judgment and order on the point of sentence. The judgment dated 11.11.2008 delivered by the Additional Sessions Judge-01, South, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in Sessions Case No. 203/2006 arising out of FIR 225/2003 registered at Police Station Kotla Mubarak Pur, under Sections 302/120B/34 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959 is under challenge in these appeals. 2. By virtue of the impugned judgment dated 11.11.2008, the appellants Suresh Pehlwan @ Suresh Basoya, Sushil Choudhary @ Sushil Pehlwan (appellants in Crl. A. No. 72/2009) and Dalip Kumar @ Gudar (appellant in Crl. A. No. 73/2009) have been convicted under Section 302/34 IPC. Appellant Suresh Pehlwan and Sushil Choudhary have also been convicted under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. Insofar as the accused Lekhraj is concerned, he was acquitted of the charges under Sections 120B/302/34 IPC. The present appell...
M.L. Dalmiya and Company Ltd. Vs. the Chairman and Managing Director, ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-2012
* #15 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (Reportable) O.M.P. 569 of 2012 M.L. DALMIYA & COMPANY LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ram K. Watel, Advocate. versus THE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, NATIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LIMITED & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sagar Bhatia, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR % ORDER 05 11.2012 1. This is a petition under Section 14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) for a direction to terminate the mandate of the Respondent No. 4, who has been appointed by the Respondent, National Building Construction Corporation Limited (NBCC) (represented by Respondents 1 to3) to act as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the Petitioner, M.L. Dalmiya & Company Ltd. and NBCC arising out of the work of expansion and modification of the terminal building and allied works at Patna Airport which was awarded to the Petitioner by a letter dated 31st December 1993 and 3rd January 1994.2. According to the Pet...
Madan Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: October 11, 2012 Pronounced on: November 05, 2012 + (i) W.P.(C) No. 5175/1998 & CM No. 14513/2010 GURDAS RAM & ORS. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. M.K. Singh, Advocate for petitioners No.1, 3, 4 & 6 Mr. G.K. Sharma, Advocate for petitioners no.2 and 5. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Joydeep Mazumdar, Mr.Rohit Dutta, Ms. Soumya Dutta, & Ms.Samina Sheikh, Advocates for respondents No. 1 to 3. Mr. Saurav Aggarwal, Advocate for R-4/IRCTC + (ii) W.P.(C) No.4566/2001 ROSHAN LAL & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. K.C. Mittal & Ms. Anjali Nehra, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Joydeep Mazumdar, Mr.Rohit Dutta, Ms. Soumya Dutta, & Ms.Samina Sheikh, Advocates for respondent - Northern Railways + (iii) W.P.(C) No.2502/2003 ALL INDIA VENDORS ASSOCIATION ... Petitioner Through: Mr. Manoj Saxena & Mr. Shwetank Sailakwal, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents ...
Harish Arora and anr. Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 1075/2012 HARISH ARORA & ANR. Through: ... Appellants Mr. Sanjeev Mehta, Adv. with Ms. Aruna Mehta, Adv. Adv. versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS...... Respondents Through: Mr. L.K. Tyagi, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The present Appeal is dismissed in terms of the judgment passed today in MAC APP. 839/2010 titled NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.. v. HARISH ARORA & ORS.2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned judgment. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE NOVEMBER 05 2012 vk...
Bhupender Singh Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:5. h November, 2012 + TR.P. (C.) 74/2012 BHUPENDER SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. R.S.Sodhi, Adv. with Mr.H.S.Hans, Adv. Versus BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Raghav Chadha, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. Notice.2. Mr. Raghav Chadha, Advocate accepts notice and says that he has no objection to the Petition.3. This is a Petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of Civil Suit No.351/2008 from the Court of Shri Kapil Kumar, Civil Judge (West) to the Special Electricity Court.4. By an order dated 12.10.2012 the Transfer Application was dismissed on the ground inter-alia that the District Judge (Central), Delhi did not have the jurisdiction to transfer the Civil Suit pending in the Court of Sh. Kapil Kumar, Civil Judge (West), Tis Hazari, Delhi to the Special Electricity Court presided by Sh.Arun Kumar Arya, Additional Sessions/...
Vijay Kumar and ors. Vs. Manoj Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 1056/2011 VIJAY KUMAR & ORS. Through: ... Appellants Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. with Ms. Suman N. Rawat, Adv. versus MANOJ KUMAR & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sumit Rana, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appeal is directed against a judgment dated 11.07.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby a Claim Petition filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) was dismissed on the ground that the deceased Harish Chand being borrower of the motorcycle not DL-4SC-AL-1329 was not entitled to claim compensation from the owner or the Insurance Company. The Claims Tribunal while reaching on this conclusion placed reliance on the Supreme Court report in Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Smt. Rajni Devi & Ors. (2008) 5 SCC 736.Ningamma & Anr. v. United India Insurance Company Limited...
Sharp Business System Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax-iii
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-05-2012
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON:10. 09.2012 PRONOUNCED ON:05. 11.2012 + ITA 492/2012 & C.M. APPL. 14836/2012 SHARP BUSINESS SYSTEM ..... Appellant Through: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Ms. Kavita Jha and Sh. Somnath Shukla, Advocates. versus THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT % The following questions of law were framed for consideration by the Court:1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal erred in holding that non-compete fee paid aggregating to Rs.3,00,00,000/- was not allowable revenue deduction.? ITA-492-12 Pag2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in holding that the non-compete fee paid was in the nature of initial outlay and thus capital expenditure? 3. Without prejudice, whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tri...
- ‹ Prev
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- Next ›
- Last »