Delhi Court October 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.
K.P.Singh Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :21. t OCTOBER, 2013 DECIDED ON :22. d OCTOBER, 2013 + CRL.A. 337/2001 K.P.SINGH ..... Appellant Through : Mr.R.M.Tewari, Advocate with Ms.Jyoti Tewari, Advocate. Versus THE STATE Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. ASI Prabhakaran, PS Delhi Cant. AND + CRL.A. 338/2001 & CRL.M.A. 1796/2001 SUMAN LATA ..... Appellant Through : Mr.R.M.Tewari, Advocate with Ms.Jyoti Tewari, Advocate. Versus THE STATE Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. ASI Prabhakaran, PS Delhi Cantt. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. K.P.Singh (A-1), Than Singh, Suman Lata Chauhan (A-2) , Ram Nath and Brij Raj Singh were arrested in case FIR No.486/87, Police Station Delhi Cantt. and sent for trial for committing offences under Sections 120B IPC, 302/364/467/471/419 IPC read with120B IPC. By a judgment dated 09.05.2001 in Sessions Case No.56/96, A-1 and A-2 were held guilty for committing offence under Section 120B IPC....
Mohd. Shakir Vs. the State (N.C.T. of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :21. t OCTOBER, 2013 DECIDED ON :22. d OCTOBER, 2013 + CRL.A. 848/2001 MOHD. SHAKIR Through : ....Appellant Mr.Imran Azeem, Advocate with Mr.Arvind Patel, Advocate along with appellant in person. versus THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) .Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. SI Bijender, PS Sri Niwas Puri. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Rustam and Mohd. Shakir (the appellant) were arrested in case FIR No.618/92 PS S.N.Puri and sent for trial for committing offences punishable under Sections 328/379/411/34 IPC on the allegations that on 01.10.1992 at about 02.00 P.M. near Bus Stand Hari Nagar Ashram, they administered stupefying substance in a fruity to Rajesh and deprived him of TSR No.DL-1R-1486, documents of the scooter and cash ` 170/-. Rajesh lodged First Information Report after he regained consciousness on 02.10.1992. TSR No.DL-1R-1486 was recovered lying abandoned on 03.10.1992. Both the accused persons ...
Krishan Kumar Vs. State and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on Pronounced on + :02. 08.2013 :22. 10.2013 O.A. No.28/2012 (u/ Ch. 2 R4of Delhi High Court Rules) in I.P.A. 14/2008 KRISHAN KUMAR Through ..... Petitioner Ms.Padmini Gupta, Advocate. Versus STATE & OTHERS Through ..... Respondents Mr.Sushil Dutt Salwan, ASC for R-1 to 3 (GNCTD). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.O.A. No.28/2012 1. The present appeal is filed by the respondents against the order dated 20th December 2011 passed by the Joint Registrar in the application of the petitioner under Order 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure holding that the petitioner does not have the means to pay the court fee ad valorem on the claim amount of Rs. 1 crore.2. It is the contention of the petitioner that he applied to respondent No.3 for running a coal depot on 29.12.1997 for which he was required to deposit a sum of Rs. 500/- as security deposit for issue of retail license. The petitioner deposited the security deposit in th...
Rajesh Kumar Vs. Ms. Sudershan Bhalla and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-2013
$~R-54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:22. d October, 2013 MAC.APP. 703/2006 RAJESH KUMAR ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. Versus MS. SUDERSHAN BHALLA & ANR. Represented by: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT ..... Respondents SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. None has been appearing on behalf of the respondents for the last two consecutive dates. Same is the position today. Therefore, this Court has no option but to proceed with the matter.2. Instant appeal has been preferred against the award dated 24.05.2006, whereby ld. Tribunal has granted compensation for a sum of Rs.4,29,520/- with interest @ 6% for a period of three years and also granted future interest @ 6% till realization.3. The present appeal has been preferred for enhancement of the aforesaid compensation amount on the ground that the Ld. Tribunal has not considered the salary of the injured/appellant as he was working with Ms. Falcon Enterprises, Bhikaji Cama Pla...
Virsa Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-2013
$~35. * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.6990/2012 Date of decision:22. d October, 2013 VIRSA SINGH ..... Petitioner Through Mr. S.S. Arora & Mr. D.S. Chadha, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Mukesh Anand, Advocate for UOI. Mr. Satish Aggarwala & Mr. Amish Aggarwala, Advocates for respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): We have heard the counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the adjudication order in original dated 16th December, 1996 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, IGI Airport, New Delhi was not served on the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner subsequently on 30th May, 2009 obtained copy of the said order and, therefore, the appeal filed was not belated or barred by limitation. He submits that copy of the adjudication order in original should have been served at least on the counsel for the petitioner. It ...
National Highways Authority of India Vs. M/S Kmc-rk-sd (Jv)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:22. 10.2013 + O.M.P. No.1043/2013 NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Versus M/S KMC-RK-SD (JV) ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner: Mr Rajiv Kapur & Mr Anil Kumar, Advs. For the Respondent: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER,J1 This is a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act) whereby challenge is laid to an award passed by a three-member arbitral tribunal dated 11.06.2013. 1.1 It may be noticed at the outset that each of the parties herein appointed their nominee arbitrators, and that, the two nominees thereafter, jointly decided on the appointment of the presiding arbitrator. It is in this manner that the arbitral tribunal came to be constituted.2. The dispute in the present petition is admittedly related to one singular issue. The issue being: whether the respondent is entitled to paymen...
Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Vs. M/S Express Securities Pvt Lt ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-2013
$~9. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL No.406/2013 & CM No.12622/2013 Date of decision:22. d October, 2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel & Mr. Puneet Gupta, Advocate. versus M/S EXPRESS SECURITIES PVT LTD. ..... Respondent Through Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): This appeal by the Revenue, which pertains to Assessment Year 2006-07, is delayed by 156 days. The appellant had earlier filed an appeal before the Allahabad High Court, which was withdrawn for lack of jurisdiction and now this appeal has been preferred before the Delhi High Court. Before issuing notice on the application for condonation of delay, we deem it appropriate to examine and consider the appeal on merits.2. The assessee is a company. In the return for the year in question, it had declared long-term capital gain of Rs.3,34,65,931/- and the sa...
Delhi Development Authority Vs. Mrs Kuljeet Kaur
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-2013
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:22. 10.2013 + LPA7642013 CAV9132013 CM APPL.16198, 16199/2013 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate. versus MRS KULJEET KAUR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. R.K. Saini, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) CAV9132013 Caveat discharged. CM APPL.16199/2013 (exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. LPA7642013, CM APPL.16198/2013 (stay) 1. The present appeal is directed against an order of the learned Single Judge allowing the respondents writ petition on 22.08.2013.2. The facts briefly are that the respondent applied for an LIG flat under the DDA Housing Scheme of 2008 and was allotted a flat. The appellant (hereafter referred to as DDA) later sought to cancel the allotment on the LPA7642013 Page 1 ground that the respondents husband owned a flat, i.e., an LIG unit bearing No.E-202, Green Val...
Kanishk Sharma and ors. Vs. University Grants Commission and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No.4071/2013 22nd October, 2013 KANISHK SHARMA & ORS. Through: ......Petitioners Dr. Surat Singh and Mr. Brajesh Kumar Sengh, Advocates. VERSUS UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Adv. for R1/UGC. Mr. Roshan Lal Goel, Adv. for R-3. Mr. A.S.Rao, Law Officer for R-4/ DMRC CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No.14422/2013 (Delay) For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and delay is condoned. CM stands disposed of. Review Petition No.533/2013 (for review of the order dated 2.7.2013) & CM No.14423/2013 (Stay) 1. This review petition is filed against the judgment dated 2.7.2013 dismissing the writ petition. For the purpose of filing the review petition, reliance is placed upon the order of a Division Bench of this Court dated 26.8.2013 passed in LPA No.617/2013. LPA No.617/2013 was preferred agai...
Narayana Bala Bharathi Vs. Vishal Gagan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:22. 10.2013 + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 19/2013, C.M. 7440/2013, 7441/2013 & 11344/2013 APPL. 7439/2013, NARAYANA BALA BHARATHI ..... Appellant Through: Sh. S.K. Pandey, Advocate. versus VISHAL GAGAN ..... Respondent Through: Sh. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Vinod Diwakar and Sh. Rana Kumar, Advocates. Respondent in Person. Sh. R.S. Goswami, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The present appeal is directed against an order of the Family Court of 15.01.2013, rejecting the appellant/wifes application for return of the proceedings on the ground that the Court lacked territorial jurisdiction. The appellant wife had applied under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, contending that the minor son whose guardianship was sought in the substantive proceedings pending before the Family Court did not ordinarily reside in Delhi within the territorial limits of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »