Delhi Court December 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.
Pratik Saxena Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: December 05, 2012 + WP(C) 7541/2012 PRATIK SAXENA ..... Petitioner Represented by: Ms.Rekha Palli, and Ms.Amrita Prakash, Advocates. versus UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Amrit Pal Singh, Advocate with Asstt.Comdt.Satyendra Kumar Jha, CISF. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Heard for final disposal at the stage of preliminary hearing itself since learned counsel for the respondents states that the writ petitioner has filed all relevant record necessary to be considered for disposal of the writ petition.2. The charge memo dated January 25, 2011 listing the charge pertaining to negligence towards duty/indiscipline against the petitioner reads as under:Force No.032570069 SI/Exe. Pratik Saxena of A Coy, North Block, Zone I, New Delhi was nominated for S.T.F. Commando Course conducted at R.T.C. Barwaha between 10.05.2010 to 03.07.20...
Pratibha Finvest P. Ltd. Vs. Ito Ward 14(3), New Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7538/2012 ITA 307/2012 Date of decision:05. 12.2012 PRATIBHA FINVEST P.LTD ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. K.R. Manjani, Advocate. versus ITO WARD 1 (3) , NEW DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Sh. Karan Khanna, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The assessee is aggrieved by an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 10.01.2011; it seeks to appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. The question of law sought to be urged in the said appeal is: Whether the Tribunal fell into error in upholding the addition of Rs.1,10,896/- as income earned by way of commission for providing accommodation entries? 2. In the writ petition, the order of the ITAT, refusing to entertain the appellants application under Section 254(2) and rectify its order made in W.P.(C) 7538/12 & ITA 307/12 Page 1 the appeal, has been impugned.3. The brief facts ...
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Suresh Bala and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
$ 31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h December, 2012 + MAC. APP. 1237/2012 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Advocate. Versus SMT. SURESH BALA & ANR. Through: None ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CM.APPL.20258/2012(Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. The Application stands disposed of. MAC.APP.1237/2012 1. The Appeal is for reduction of compensation of `13,80,000/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) in favour of the Respondents No.1 and 2 for the death of Neeraj Yadav, a bachelor who was a IIIrd (Final) Year student of B.SC. in Bio-Technology, GIS Institute of Professional Studies, H.N.B. Garhwal University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand.2. By the impugned judgment, the Claims Tribunal referred to Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy, AIR 201.SC 100.assumed deceaseds income...
Hari Om Maheshwari Vs. Usha Maheshwari
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :29. h November, 2012 Pronounced on :5. h December, 2012 % + CRL.M.C. 387/2012 & Crl.M.A. No.1341/2012 (Stay) HARI OM MAHESHWARI Through : .....Petitioner Petitioner in person. versus USHA MAHESHWARI Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Vikas Goyal, Adv. AND + CRL.M.C. 438/2012 HARI OM MAHESHWARI Through : .....Petitioner Petitioner in person. versus USHA MAHESHWARI Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Vikas Goyal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI % PRATIBHA RANI, J.1. By this common order, I shall dispose of Crl.M.C. No.387/2012 and Crl.M.C.438/2012 as not only the parties to both the petitions are common but the main issue on the basis of which quashing has been sought by the petitioner revolves around the payment allegedly received by respondent Usha Maheshwari in a case under Section 138 NI Act on the basis of which the petitioner is seeking refund of Rs.4.5 lacs paid by him towards interim maintenance and quashing of the order awa...
Rajender Prasad Vs. Deepak Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
$ 10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h December, 2012 + MAC. APP. 1158/2011 RAJENDER PRASAD Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate. Versus DEEPAK KUMAR & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Advocate for the Respondent No.3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of `1,52,980/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) in favour of the Appellant for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 08.01.2007.2. In the absence of any Appeal by the driver, owner or the insurer of the offending vehicle; the finding on negligence has attained finality.3. The only ground of challenge raised by the Appellant is that he (the Appellant) was working as a diesel tank clutch plate mechanic. On account of 45% permanent disability in relation to his right lower limb and on account of stiffness of knee, he is unable to per...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Chander Lal and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
$ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h December, 2012 + MAC. APP. 86/2012 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate. Versus CHANDER LAL & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate for the Respondent No.1 & 2. Mr. Vegeesh Sharma, Advocate for the Respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The present Appeal is allowed in terms of the judgment passed today in MAC.APP.82/2012 titled NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. PREM PRASAD BHANDARI & ORS.2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned judgment. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE DECEMBER 05 2012 pst...
Neeta Ajay Kumar and ors. Vs. Veena Narang and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + I.A. No. 15329/2012 (by the defendant u/S 5 & 14 of the Limitation Act) & OA No.90/2012 in CS(OS) 2382/2009 Date of Decision:5. 12.2012 IN THE MATTER OF NEETA AJAY KUMAR & ORS. Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr. Amar Khera, Advocate versus VEENA NARANG & ANR. Through ..... Defendants Mr. Lalit Gupta and Mr. Ashish Kumar, Advocates CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) I.A. No. 15329/2012 (by the defendant u/S 5 & 14 of the Limitation Act) & OA No.90/2012 in CS(OS) 2382/2009 1. The present application has been filed by the defendant (appellant herein) for condonation of delay in filing the accompanying Chamber Appeal. Although notice was issued only on the application, counsel for the non-applicant/plaintiff has filed a composite reply to the Chamber Appeal and the interim application and both the parties have addressed arguments not only on the application, but also on the appeal.2. In view of the above, both, the present app...
Rohit Sakhuja Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLICATION NO.1736/2012 Decided on : ROHIT SAKHUJA Through:5. h December, 2012 Petitioner Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr. H.S. Bhullar, Mr. Dheeraj, Mr. Ankit and Mr. S. Pandey, Advocates. Versus STATE & ANR. Through: Respondents Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP for the State. Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Advocate for DRI. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. No.19546/2012 (for exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to the deficiency being rectified.2. The application stands disposed of. Bail Application No.1736/2012 1. This is an application filed by the petitioner under Section 438 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.254/2012, under Sections 380/468/471/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Pur Prahladpur.2. Briefly stated the allegations against the petitioner are that on 25.5.2012, eight containers containing goods of various description, imported at ICD, Tughlakabad, New ...
Asha Verma Vs. Ceat Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) No. 7802 of 2008 Reserved on:13. h September, 2012 Decided on:5. h December, 2012 % ASHA VERMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Anuj Aggarwal and Mr. M.M. Saquib Ali, Advocates. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sandeep Narain and Ms. Shalu Lal, Advocates. versus CEAT LTD. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By the present petition the Petitioner impugns the award dated 23rd July, 2008 whereby though the termination of the Petitioner was held to be illegal however, she was granted a lump sum compensation of Rs. 1.75 lakhs instead of reinstatement and back wages.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner had rendered 24 years of service with the Respondent and had categorically stated that she was not gainfully employed after she was terminated despite her best efforts as she attained the age of 45 years. As during the pendency of the proceedings before the learned Trial Court she attained the age of superannuation...
Emeter India Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. ---------------------------------- ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
$~A4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:5th December, 2012 % + CO.APPL.(M) 179/2012 IN THE MATTER OF eMETER INDIA PVT LTD ..... Applicant Transferor Company AND SIEMENS TECHNOLOGY AND SERVICES PVT. LTD. Through ..... Transferee Company Mr. Sharat Vaid and Mr. S. Jain, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) CO.APPL.(M) 179/2012 1. This is an application under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (the Act) seeking directions from this Honble court for dispensing with the convening and holding of the meetings of the equity shareholders and creditors of the Applicant Transferor Company for the purpose of considering and if thought fit, approving with or without modifications, the Scheme of Amalgamation of eMETER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED with SIEMENS TECHNOLOGY AND SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme) on the terms and conditions and for the consideration as stated in the said Scheme, a copy whereof h...
- ‹ Prev
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- Next ›
- Last »