Delhi Court July 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.
Cit Vs. Rl Traders
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-10-2012
1. Admit. The following substantial question of law arises in these batch of appeals i.e. whether the Tribunal’s approach in confirming the CIT’s order which had deleted the addition made on account of unsecured loans by the Assessing Officer, for the concerned assessment years i.e. 2000-01 to 2006-07 and the interest component, is correct, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee’s premises were searched on 13.12.2005, pursuant to which, a notice was issued under Section-153A on 09.07.2007 for the assessment years, 2000-01 to 2006-07. A detailed questionnaire was issued under Section-142 (1)/143 (2) on 29.10.2007. The assessee filed returns thereafter. The firm claimed to have earned NIL income. One of the claims made by the assessee was in respect of unsecured loans obtained from individuals and firms. The assessee was required to file the details of such loans obtained along with complete particu...
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation Vs. Zee Telefilms Ltd. and Othe ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-10-2012
Anil Kumar, J. 1. These are the applications by the plaintiff/applicant under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 and under Order 26 Rule 9 seeking interim injunction against Zee Telefilms Ltd from making, telecasting or broadcasting or in any other manner communicating to the public the television serial/cinematograph film titled `Time Bomb' and not to do anything without obtaining a license from the plaintiff and for directions to the defendants, their partners, servants, agents, representatives to hand over possession of the infringing copies and all other incriminating material including the original script and all plates for production of cinematograph film titled `Time Bomb' in a suit for permanent, mandatory injunction and rendition of accounts for the alleged infringement of copyright of the plaintiff. 2. The suit was initially filed against M/s.Zee Telefilms Ltd. During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff filed an application being IA No.4822/2005 to implead Ms.Deepa Sahi, Mr.Ketan Meht...
Varun Gauba Vs. Punjab and Sind Bank and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-2012
V.K. Jain, J. Oral: 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 3rd March, 2012 whereby the application of the appellant for grant of leave to contest was dismissed and a decree for recovery of Rs.5,93,099/- along with simple interest on that amount at the rate of 9% per annum was passed against the appellant and three others. The facts giving rise to the filing of this appeal can be summarized as under:- RameshKumar Gupta, proprietor of New Orient Transport Company, which was defendant No.1 in the suit and is respondent No.2 in this appeal, had a current account with the plaintiff/respondent No.1 – Punjab and Sind Bank and in that account, he availed overdraft facility on payment of interest at the rate of 6.5% per annum above the Reserve Bank of India rate subject to minimum rate of 16.5% per annum with quarterly rests. He also requested respondent No.1 bank to purchase three cheques of Rs.1,25,000/-, Rs.1,05,000/- and Rs.1,25,000/- respectively drawn by M/...
M/S. R.K. Machine Tools (P) Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Ot ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-2012
ANIL KUMAR, J. 1. The petitioner, M/s. RK machine tools, has sought the quashing of the order dated 14th May, 1986 passed by Respondent No.2, the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, New Delhi and a declaration that ‘deemed exports’as defined in the Government notifications covers the cases of advance licenses in the same manner as they cover the case of duty replenishment licenses in the facts and circumstances of the petitioner. 2. The brief facts as contended by the petitioners are that the petitioner No.1 is a company duly registered under the Indian Companies Act and is also a member of the Engineering Export Promotion Council since 1974, while petitioner no. 2, is a shareholder and one of the directors of petitioner no.1. 3. Petitioner No.1 was manufacturing and trading company of Northern India and Asia and was engaged in the business of making metallic goods, including defense equipment, machine tools, textile machinery, stainless steel utensils etc. for over tw...
Pankaj Negi Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-2012
Anil Kumar, J. 1. The petitioner has challenged the Summary Security Force Court trial conducted against him and his consequent dismissal from service by order dated 28th April, 1999 and he has also sought the quashing of the same on the ground of being unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The petitioner has further sought the quashing the order in appeal passed by the respondents, dismissing his appeal. He has in addition sought his reinstatement with full back wages and all consequential reliefs. 2. Brief relevant facts to comprehend the dispute are that the petitioner was enrolled with the Border Security Force at BSF STC Bangalore and after his enrollment he completed his basic training. Thereafter, he was posted to the unit on 18th February, 1994. The petitioner was thereafter, posted in `A' Coy which was deployed at Border Out Post (BOP) Govindpur. 3. On 7th September, 1998, the petitioner was on operation duty at Gate No.16 of IBB fencing, wh...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Budh Prakash
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-2012
P.K.BHASIN, J: 1. By way of this writ petition the petitioner–employer has challenged the Award dated 16-12-2006 of the Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Delhi in ID No. 92/06(old no. 89/05) whereby the respondent–workman, who was employed as a muster roll beldar with Municipal Corporation of Delhi, had been ordered to be reinstated in service with 50% of back wages and it was also directed that the case for his regularization in service be also considered as per the policy of regularization of daily wagers/muster roll employees by the petitioner-employer treating his seniority from 25.04.1995. 2. The learned Tribunal has found after appreciating the evidence adduced by the parties that the services of the respondent–workman had been terminated by the petitioner-employer and he had not abandoned his job as was its plea and further that the respondent-workman had worked for a period of 240 days in the year preceding the date of termination of his services and his employment w...
Colonel A.D. Nargolkar Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-2012
ANIL KUMAR, J. 1. The petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 30th September, 2009 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, dismissing the original applications bearing O.A. No. 50/2009 and O.A. No. 53/2009, upholding the order of censure dated 5th June, 2008 imposed on the petitioner. The petitioner has sought the quashing of the Court of Inquiry proceedings initiated against him and the setting aside of the order of severe displeasure (recordable) dated 5th June, 2008. He has further sought directions against the respondents to promote the petitioner as brigadier with all consequential benefits from the date his immediate juniors were promoted. 2. The brief facts as contended by the petitioner are that he had become an officer in the Indian Army in the year 1979 and that during his service he had undergone “stiff selection” based Courses i.e. the Long Gunnery Staff Course (1987), Defence Services Staff College Course (1992) and finally Higher Command Cou...
M/S. Fiitjee Ltd. and Another Vs. Dr. Kanwal Sujit
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-2012
1. By this common judgment I shall dispose of these two appeals between the same parties. RFA 669/2003 is directed against the judgment and decree dated 24.5.2003 whereby a decree for recovery of Rs.488664/- with cost and pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 18% per annum, was passed in favour of respondent and against the appellants whereas RFA 373/2004 is directed against the judgment and decree dated 15.3.2001 whereby a decree under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure for recovery of Rs.3,85,000/- with cost and pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 18% per annum was passed in favour of the respondent and against the appellants and Order dated 24.5.2002 whereby the application of the appellants under Order XXXVII Rule 3(7) of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Rule 4 thereof was dismissed. 2. The facts giving rise to the filing of these appeals can be summarized as under: The respondent/plaintiff who is the proprietor of the Design Build Consortium, ...
Sh. Gopal Johari Vs. Sh. Anup Diwan and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-2012
Manmohan Singh, J. 1. By this order, I propose to decide application under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC filed by the defendants No.1 and 2 for rejection of the plaint. 2. The facts are that the plaintiff has filed the present suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 12th November, 2002 which was executed in respect of the property bearing No.171/S-25, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi. 3. The main contention of the defendants No.1 and 2 in the application is that as per the agreement dated 12th November, 2002, the defendant No.1 was to obtain the sale permission from LandDO within 90 days period and then to execute the sale deed and the balance consideration of Rs.32 lac was payable at the time of execution of the sale deed. It is further averred that as alleged by the plaintiff, the defendant No.1 failed to obtain the sale permission within the period of 90 days from the date of agreement. The period of 90 days expired on 11th February, 2003. Accordingly, the caus...
Shanker Trading (P) Ltd. and Another Vs. the Cit and Another.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-2012
V.K. Jain, J. 1. M/s Shankar Trading (P) Limited (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) is engaged in the business of Kathaand Cutch and had taken on lease, with effect from 01.06.1978, a factory belonging to Mehta Charitable Prajnalay Trust (hereinafter referred to as “the Trust”), which also was engaged in the business of manufacturing of the same products. Shri Bishan Dass and Shri Raj Kumar, two of the trustees of the Trust were also the directors and shareholders of the Assessee Company. 3 out of 5 directors of the assessee company were the sons of two trustees of the Trust. It is also an admitted position that bulk of the shares of the assessee Company was held by the trustees of the Trust and their family members. Initially, the lease rent was fixed at Rs 25,000/- p.m., which was later increased first to be Rs 50,000/- p.m. and then to Rs 1,00,000/- p.m. As on 31.12.1991, the assessee was paying lease rental of Rs 1,00,000/- p.m. to the Trust, in respect of the fa...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »