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.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.R.B.L. Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:20. h November, 2012 Date of Decision:5. h December, 2012 % + + + ITA 20.of 2009 ITA 22.of 2009 ITA 41.of 2009 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .....Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Ruchesh Sinha, Advocate. Versus M/S K.R.B.L. LIMITED Through: ......Respondent Mr. S. K. Aggarwal, Advocate. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR, J.For orders see ITA No.201/2009. (R.V. EASWAR) JUDGE (S. RAVINDRA BHAT) JUDGE DECEMBER 05 2012 AK...
Union of India Vs. Himachal Futuristic Communications Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI F-138 + OMP No. 127 of 2008 UNION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajeeve Mehra, Additional Solicitor General with Ms. Swati Sinha, Mr. Ashish Virmani, Mr. Mohit Garg, Mr. B.V. Niren and Mr. Prasouk Jain, Advocates. versus HIMACHAL FUTURISTIC COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Senior Advocate with Mr. C. Bhattacharyya, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER 05 12.2012 1. The Petitioner, Union of India (UOI), through the Secretary, Department of Telecommunications (DOT), has, in this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act), challenged an Award dated 12th October 2007 passed by the arbitral Tribunal (Tribunal) in the dispute between the UOI and the Respondent, Himachal Futuristic Communications Limited (HFCL), arising out of a Share Purchase Agreement (SPA) OMP No. 127 of 2008 October 2001 whereby 11,10,000 equity shares (74%) of Hindustan Teleprinters L...
icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sukhdev Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
$ 7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h December, 2012 + MAC. APP. 232/2010 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate. Versus SUKHDEV SINGH & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The question involved in this Appeal centres around the liability of the Appellant Insurance Company to indemnify the insured.2. A compensation of `95,878/- was awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) in favour of the First Respondent for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 18.07.2006. The driver of the offending vehicle (Respondent No.2 herein) was driving a two-wheeler not DL-5SV-3258 which caused the accident. He (Respondent No.2) was holding a licence to drive only an LMV. He did not possess any driving licence to drive a two-wheeler. The Claims Tribunal, however, held that since an LMV was a heav...
Rakshak Krishan Lal Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
1. The petitioner by this petition has prayed that the Discharge Certificate dated 08.01.2008 may be quashed and petitioner may be reinstated in Defence Security Corps with all consequential benefits in the light of the judgment of the Honble Delhi High Court and Armed Forces Tribunal placed herein. 2. The petitioner was enrolled in the Corps of EME on 26.06.1985 and after serving for 16 years was discharged on 30.06.2001. Thereafter, he applied for re-enrolment in the DSC in March, 2004 and June, 2006. He was called by BRO Amritsar and after completion of physical proficiency tests he was re-enrolled on 27.03.2007 (i.e. after 6 years) and after rigorous training he was posted to a field area in Hashmira near Bhutan. Ten months later i.e. on 08.01.2008 he was discharged from service on the specious ground that in accordance with policy letter dated-12.10.2007 the gap between discharge from Army and date of re-enrolment should be within five years and admittedly this rule was not preval...
Ex. Capt. P.T. Peethamber Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2012
By Chairperson 1. Petitioner by this petition has prayed to quash the order dated- 16.6.2009 passed by the Dy.Director PS-4 (legal), Addl. Directorate General of Pers Services, Adjutant Generals branch, Army HQs, New Delhi and to direct the respondent to alter the punishment of the applicant from cashiering to that of compulsory retirement and he be given all terminal benefits. 2. Petitioner joined the Indian Army as a Junior Commissioned Officer in 1970 and in 1986, he was promoted to the rank of Captain. Petitioner was court-martialled and punished by cashiering and R.I. of one year by the order dated- 10.12.1998. The petitioner filed a writ petition No.187/98 in the Honble Guwahati High Court against the Order of the General Court Martial for the aforesaid punishment. The Honble Guwahati High Court remitted the matter back to the confirming authority to reconsider the sentence in the light of submissions and observations made in the Order dated-10.12.1998. Then he filed an appeal be...
Nishant Gupta Vs. University of Delhi and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:4. h December, 2012 % + LPA 792/2012 NISHANT GUPTA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Mahendra Singh, Advocate. Versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Mohinder J.S Rupal, Advocate for R-1. Mr. A.P.S. Ahluwalia, Sr. Advocate with Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate for R-2. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J CM No.20159/2012 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. LPA 792/2012 1. This intra court appeal impugns the judgment dated 19 th October, 2012 of the learned Single Judge of dismissal of W.P.(C) No.3121/2012 preferred by the appellant. Counsels for the respondent No.1 University and respondent No.2 Dayal Singh College appear on advance notice and we have with consent heard the appeal finally.2. The appellant was in July, 2009 admitted to the first year of the B.Sc. (Honours), Maths course in the responden...
M/S Rubfila International Ltd. Vs. Alok Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:November 7, 2011 Judgment Pronounced on: December 04,2012 + RFA (OS) No.40/2011 M/S RUBFILA INTERNATIONAL LTD. .... Appellant Represented by: Ms.V.Mohana, Advocate. versus ALOK GUPTA Represented by: .... Respondent Mr.Arun Birbal, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The respondent Alok Gupta filed a suit against the appellant pleading that he was carrying on business as the sole proprietor of M/s.Alok Enterprises and with effect from November 01, 1996 was appointed as an agent by the appellant for sale of its products in Northern India and he had to receive commission @1% on the sales made by the appellant to third parties on orders obtained by him and further that a part of his property would be taken on rent @ `5,000/- per month from November 01, 1996 by the appellant and additionally he was to be reimbursed office expenses for the office use ...
Usha Srivastava Vs. Progressive Finlease Ltd and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO 106/2010 % Judgment delivered on:04. 12.2012 USHA SRIVASTAVA Through : ..... Appellant Ms. Pratima N. Chauhan, Amicus Curiae versus PROGRESSIVE FINLEASE LTD & ORS Through : None ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.* 1. Present is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the impugned judgment dated 23.11.2011 passed by the Commissioner under the aforesaid Act wherein claim petition of the appellant for grant of compensation has been dismissed.2. Briefly, the facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are as under:The appellants husband late Sh. V.K. Srivastava was working with respondent no. 1 company as an Accounts Assistant performing activities like preparation of tax papers, filing and preparing Income-tax Returns on behalf of the respondent company. Besides the aforesaid work, it is alleged that the husband of appellant w...
Y.S.Manchanda Vs. Mcd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
06. $~1 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 8186/2009, CM Nos.13583/2009, 13584/2009, 14793/2009 & 13660-61/2009 % Judgment dated 04.12.2012 Y.S.MANCHANDA Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.S.C. Nigam, Adv. versus MCD Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Ajay Arora, Adv. for respondent no.1. Mr.Santosh Kumar, Adv. for Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Adv. for respondent no.2. Mr.M.K. Chaudhary, Adv. for respondents no.3 and 4. Mr.Subodh K. Pathak, Adv. for Ms.Yeshma Hinduja, applicant in CM 14793/2009. Mr.T.N. Tripathi, Adv. for the applicant in CM 13583-84/2009. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed by petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ, order or direction to the respondent no.1 MCD to grant a completion certificate/regularization plans duly certified to the petitioner in respect of the ground floor of the property bearing no.15, Siri Fort Road, New Delhi; and carry out demolition of the non-compoundab...
Chunman @ Akash Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
$~12 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 270/2012 Judgment reserved on 29th November, 2012 Judgement delivered on 4th December, 2012 % CHUNMAN @ AKASH Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ravi Chaturvedi, Adv. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Fizani Hussain, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K. PATHAK, J.1. Appellant has been convicted under Section 392 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of `1,000/-; in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one week by the Trial Court.2. That is how appellant is before this Court by way of present appeal.3. Prosecution story, as unfolded, is that on 9th March, 2009 at about 08:45 pm complainant-Mangal along with his friend Shyam was returning home; when they reached near Bharat Nagar liquor shop within the jurisdiction of police station Ashok Vihar appellant along with his accomplice intercepted them, took out complainants purse from his pocket ...
- ‹ Prev
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- Next ›
- Last »