Delhi Court January 2013 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 Service Tax Vs. Consulting Engineering Services (i) Pv ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:14. 01.2013 ST.APPL. 76/2012 COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX ... Petitioner versus CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES (I) PVT. LTD. ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr Rahul Kaushik, Adv. : Mr M P Devnath, Mr Aditya Bhattacharya, Mr Tarun Jain, Mr Bhuvnesh Satija and Mr Abhishek Anand, Advs. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. Admit.3. With their consent this appeal shall be taken for disposal straightaway. The question for determination is: Whether, in respect of the services provided prior to 14.05.2003 but, in respect of which payments were received on or after 14.05.2003 service tax was chargeable @ 5% or @8% which rate came into force on 14.05.2003? 4. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 16.03.2012 passed by the Customs, Excise and S...
The Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs. A.P.L. Industries Ltd. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-2013
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:14. 01.2013 + WP(C) 1261/2002 THE SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ......PETITIONER Vs A.P.L. INDUSTRIES LTD. & ORS. .....RESPONDENTS ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE: For the Petitioner: Ms. Maninder Acharya, Advocate For the Respondents: None CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J 1.This writ petition has been filed to assail the order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal (in short SAT) dated 18.10.2010.2. It may be pertinent to note that by the said order, SAT has reversed the order dated 22.05.1998 passed by the Chairman, Security and Exchange Board of India (in short SEBI).3. The challenge arises in the background of the following facts, most of which are not in dispute :3.1 Respondent no.1/company had floated a prospectus for a public issue of 30 Lakhs equity shares of a face value of Rs.10/- each, for cash at par aggregating to a total sum of Rs.3 Crores. The public issue opened on 26.02.19...
New Delhi Municipal Council Vs. Dan Singh Bawa (Deceased) Through Lega ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:11. h January, 2013 % + Review Petition No.712/2012 and CM No.20550/2012 (for condonation of delay) In LPA No.210/2009 NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Through: None. ..... Appellant Versus DAN SINGH BAWA (DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES & ORS. ..... Respondents/ Review Applicant Through: Mr. Rajiv Sahani, Sr. Adv. with Mr. P. Nagesh & Mr. Anand M. Mishra, Advs. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.Review is sought of the judgment dated 18.09.2012 allowing the appeal on the ground that there is an error apparent inasmuch as the judgment fails to notice that the learned Single Judge vide order dated 22.07.2005 had reviewed the earlier judgment dated 24.03.2005 and that the order dated 22.07.2005 had not been challenged and had attained finality. The senior counsel for the respondents / review applicants further contends Review Petition No.712/2012 & CM No.20550/2012 (for...
Siddharth Optical Disc Pvt. Ltd and Another Vs. Union of India and Ano ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:11. 01.2013 WP (C) No. 13231/2009 SIDDHARTH OPTICAL DISC PVT. LTD & OTHERS ... Petitioners ... Respondents versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners For the Respondents : MrN.K. Kaul, Sr Advocate with MrVineetMalhotra : MrSatishAggarwal with Mr P.K. Sharma and MrSantosh P. Chaurasia AND + WP (C) No. 8165/2011 SIDDHARTH OPTICAL DISC PVT. LTD &ANOTHER ... Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners For the Respondents : Mr N.K. Kaul, Sr Advocate with MrVineetMalhotra : Mr P.K. Sharma with MrSantosh P. Chaurasia CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MRJUSTICE V.K. JAIN JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J 1.These writ petitions raise common issues and are, therefore being disposed of by this common judgment. WP(C) 13231/2009 pertains to the period March, 2005 to March, 2009, whereas WP(C) 8165/2011 ...
Rakesh @ Dhillo Vs. State of the Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 1309/2011 Decided on:11. h January, 2013 % RAVI KUMAR ..... Appellant Through Ms. Nandita Rao, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through + Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP with SI Rajiv PS Najafgarh Colony. CRL.A. 1333/2011 RAKESH @ DHILLO Through ..... Appellant Ms. Anita Abraham, Adv. versus STATE OF THE NCT OF DELHI Through ..... Respondent Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP with SI Rajiv PS Najafgarh Colony. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MS. MUKTA GUPTA, J (ORAL) 1. These appeals can be disposed of together as they challenge the common judgment dated 29th April, 2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicting the Appellants herein for offence under Section 307/34 IPC and Appellant Rakesh Kumar @ Dhillo for offence under Section 25 Arms Act as well. Vide the impugned order dated 30 th April, 2011 both the Appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years and a fine of Rs 5000/- in default of p...
Shrikant Sharma Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C)No.7208/2011 Reserved on:5. h December, 2012 Date of decision:11. h January, 2013 % SHRIKANT SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Adv. with Ms. T. B. Saahila Lamba and Mr. Amandeep Joshi, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ankur Chibber, Adv. for R-1 to 4. Mr. S.S. Pandey, Adv. for R-5. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT GITA MITTAL, J.1. Thomas Jefferson said that Experience has shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. Tyranny points towards arbitrariness. The instant case raises this issue with full force.2. The writ petitioner assails the order dated 22nd of September 2011 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal rejecting O.A.No.161/2011. By this petition, the petitioner had challenged the legality of the action of the respondents in considering...
Ravi Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 1309/2011 Decided on:11. h January, 2013 % RAVI KUMAR ..... Appellant Through Ms. Nandita Rao, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through + Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP with SI Rajiv PS Najafgarh Colony. CRL.A. 1333/2011 RAKESH @ DHILLO Through ..... Appellant Ms. Anita Abraham, Adv. versus STATE OF THE NCT OF DELHI Through ..... Respondent Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP with SI Rajiv PS Najafgarh Colony. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MS. MUKTA GUPTA, J (ORAL) 1. These appeals can be disposed of together as they challenge the common judgment dated 29th April, 2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicting the Appellants herein for offence under Section 307/34 IPC and Appellant Rakesh Kumar @ Dhillo for offence under Section 25 Arms Act as well. Vide the impugned order dated 30 th April, 2011 both the Appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years and a fine of Rs 5000/- in default of p...
M/S Mysore Lamps Works Ltd. Vs. Girish Kumar Jain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 31/2013 M/S MYSORE LAMPS WORKS LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr Harvinder Singh, Adv. versus GIRISH KUMAR JAIN ..... Respondent Through: Counsel for the respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN % 1. ORDER 11 01.2013 The services of the respondent, who was appointed as Sales Representative with appellant, were terminated with effect from 25.04.1989. Feeling aggrieved, the respondent raised an industrial dispute, claiming the termination to be illegal. On the said dispute being referred to the Industrial Tribunal, reinstatement of the respondent with back wages till 05.05.1992 was ordered vide award dated 13.10.2003.2. Feeling aggrieved from the order passed by the Tribunal, the appellant filed WP(C) No. 18887/2006, which is pending disposal. The respondent -1- filed CM No. 17172/2006 under Section 17-B of Industrial Disputes Act. The application was opposed by the appellant on the ground that the respon...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ranjit Pandey and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.APP.No.792/2006 Date of Decision :11. h January, 2013 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Karan Chaudhary, proxy counsel for Mr. R.N. Sharma, Adv. versus RANJIT PANDEY & ORS. Through : .... Respondents Mr. Idresh Ahmed, Adv. for R-1 CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA ORDER 1 The Claims Tribunal passed an award for Rs.13,77,000/- in favour of respondent no.1 which is under challenge in this appeal. Vide order dated 18th September, 2006, this Court issued notice of the appeal to the respondents and in the meantime, directed 50% of the award amount to be released to respondent no.1 in terms of the award.2. During the course of hearing on 9th November, 2012, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the entire award amount along with interest was deposited by the appellant with the Claims Tribunal prior to filing of this appeal on 7th September, 2006 and the receipt of deposit of the award amount was filed by t...
Ashok Kumar Aswal Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) No. 578/2010 % Judgment reserved on:05. 11.2012 Judgment delivered on:11.01.2013 ASHOK KUMAR ASWAL Through: ..Petitioner Mr. Sanjay Parekh, Mr. Shanmuga Patro, Mr. Shivanath Mahanta and Mr. Sanjay Aiswal, Advocates. Versus UOI AND ORS. Through: ..Respondents Dr. Ashwani Bhardwaj and Mr. Jitender Choudhary, Advocates for Respondent No.1. Mr. R.V. Sinha, Mr. A.S. Singh and Mr. Pradeep Kumar Singh, Advocates for Respondent CVC (R-2). Mr. P.K. Sharma, Standing Counsel with Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate for Respondent CBI (R-3). CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.+ W.P. (C) No. 578/2010 1. The present petition has been directed against the order dated 21.10.2009, whereby the respondent No. 1 has accorded sanction under Section 19(1) (a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for the prosecution of the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 120-B IPC and Section 7/13 (2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the...
- ‹ Prev
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- Next ›
- Last »