Delhi Court November 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.
Hitesh Bhardwaj and anr. Vs. Alaknanda Properties P. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + R.S.A. No.146 of 2008 Decided on :25. h November, 2013 HITESH BHARDWAJ & ANR. Appellants Through: Mr. Pankaj Vivek & Mr. Atul Tripathi, Advocates. Versus ALAKNANDA PROPERTIES P. LTD. & ANR. Respondents Through: Mr. Deepak Dhingra & Mr. Deepak Khosla, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a regular second appeal under Section 100 (2) CPC against the order dated 17.3.2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge in R.C.A. No.84/2005 titled M/s. Alaknanda Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Parmeshwari & Ors. The present appeal is pending in this court for the last almost five years.2. The learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the appellants have a right to maintain the regular second appeal while as this court has reservations about the said right. In order to appreciate this issue, it may be relevant to give brief background of the case.3. M/s. Alaknanda Properties Pvt. Ltd./respondent No.1 here...
Narendra and Co Vs. Religare Commodities Ltd and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.341/2011 Date of Decision :25. 11.2013 NARENDRA & CO ..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.M. Tatia, Advocate. versus RELIGARE COMMODITIES LTD & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Rohit Puri, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant.2. It has been contended that the learned arbitrator as well as the learned trial court while considering the objections of the appellant has failed to take into account the fact that the appellant was entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,44,926.92 by way of refund of VAT while as the appellant has been directed to be paid by the arbitrator only a sum of Rs.10,958.40 on account of the same. In this regard, the learned counsel for the appellant sought to draw the attention of the court to Annexure P-2 which is the contract note issued by the Religare Commodities Limited. The learned counsel has also drawn the attention of this court to the endorsements...
Shri B.R. Sharma Vs. Syndicate Bank and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.484/1997 25th November, 2013 % SHRI B.R. SHARMA Through: ..... Petitioner Petitioner in person. Versus SYNDICATE BANK AND ORS. Through: Respondents Mr. Jagat Arora, Advocate with Mr. Rajat Arora, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner impugns the orders passed by the departmental authorities; the disciplinary authority dated 24.6.1995 and the appellate authority dated 9.2.1996; imposing the punishment on the petitioner of reduction in basic pay by three stages in the time scale of pay.2. The facts of the case are that petitioner was issued a charge- sheet dated 18.11.1992, inter alia raising two charges against the petitioner. First was of not relieving an employee posted at the extension counter at the DTC Patpar Ganj back to the parent branch at Nirman Vihar, New Delhi and secondly of assaulting Sh. G.R. Shenoy,...
Fashion Design Council of India Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. h November, 2013 + Writ Petition (Civil) 4599/2013 FASHION DESIGN COUNCIL OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajiv Bansal, Mr. Jitendra Singh, Mr. Saurabh S. Sinha, Ms. Anushree Kapadia and Ms. Rashmi Singh, Advocates. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr. Parag Tripathi, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani, Additional Standing Counsel, Ms. Bandana Shukla and Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocates for GNCTD. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) On 23rd July, 2013, the following interim order was passed in this writ petition filed by Fashion Design Council of India: (i) The petitioner has deposited a Fixed Deposit Receipt of Rs.2.25 lacs as provided in Rule 30 of the Delhi Entertainment and Betting Tax Rules, 1997. (ii) As and when the petitioner receives sponsorship money, he shall furnish security i...
Abhimanyu Singh Vs. Union of India Through Its Home Secretary and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6752/2013 % Date of decision:25. h November, 2013 ABHIMANYU SINGH Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS HOME SECRETARY & ORS. ..... Respondent Through : Ms. Barkha Babbar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA GITA MITTAL, J (Oral) 1. The respondents are present on advance notice and have produced the relevant record.2. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has sought setting aside of the order dated 28th October, 1995, whereby, the petitioner was administratively dismissed from services on the ground that he was absent without leave w.e.f. 11th May, 1995 till date of passing of such order.3. This order was passed after issuance of notice to show cause to the petitioner. The petitioner rests on the sole ground that while posted with 11th Battallion of BSF since 8th May, 1995 at the Dhol Chera, Assam, he received a letter from...
Pooja Sharma Vs. Gurmeet Kaur
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on: November 25, 2013 + C.R.P. No.17/2013 POOJA SHARMA Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Mohit Gupta, Adv. with Ms.Megha Gaur & Ms.Alka Chojar, Advs. versus GURMEET KAUR Through ..... Respondent Mr.R.P.Singh, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioner (plaintiff before the learned trial Court) has assailed the order dated 18th September, 2012 whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order XII Rule 6 read with Section 151 CPC was dismissed.2. The case of the petitioner before the learned trial Court was that one Sh.Harbans Lal son of Late Sh.Komal Ram Arora was the earlier owner of Flat No.22, situated on first floor in Surair Co-operative Group Housing Society, plot No.7, Sector-15, Rohini, Delhi-110085 (hereinafter referred to as the suit property) and inducted the respondent (defendant in suit proceedings) as his tenant on a monthly rent of `2000/- excluding other charges vide a...
Manu Khanna Vs. Dr. V.P. Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No.721 of 2005 & IA Nos. 3101 of 2011, 9357 of 2011 Reserved on: October 22, 2013 Date of decision: November 22, 2013 MANU KHANNA ..... Plaintiff Through: Dr. Poonam Khanna, mother, in person versus DR. V.P. SHARMA ..... Defendant-in-person CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR J U D G M EN T2211.2013 1. Mr. Manu Khanna, son of Dr. Poonam Khanna and the Defendant, Dr. V.P. Sharma, has filed the present suit for declaration, partition and mandatory injunction in respect of the terrace and above rights of the property at C-18, Shivalik, New Delhi.2. The Plaintiff is stated to be a mentally challenged person. He has, therefore, filed the present suit through his mother, Dr. Poonam Khanna. The plaint states the Plaintiffs mother purchased the basement and the terrace and above rights of the property at C-18, Shivalik, New Delhi with her self-earned income after selling her flat in Vasant Kunj, which she had purchased with her earned income. It is stat...
Commissioner of Income Tax-v Vs. Shri Ashok Kumar Ralhan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
$~1. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL No.505/2013 Date of decision:22. d November, 2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V ..... Appellant Through Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Mr. P. Roy Chaudhuri & Mr. Nitin Gulati, Advocates. Versus SHRI ASHOK KUMAR RALHAN ..... Respondent Through Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short), deserves dismissal at the admission stage itself.2. The Assessing Officer made two additions. Firstly, benefit under Section 54F of the Act was denied and capital gains of Rs.51,71, 994/- was brought to tax. The second addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.19,75,410/- under Section 68 of the Act was deleted by the CIT(Appeals) recording that the said addition was entirely unjustified. The Assessing Officer himself in the remand report accepted the f...
Mukesh Kumar Vs. State Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :22. d November, 2013 + CRL.A. 776/2001 MUKESH KUMAR ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Sandeep Kumar, Advocate. versus STATE GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI Through : ..... Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) Crl.M.A.17633/2013 For the reasons mentioned in the application, the non-bailable warrants issued against the appellant vide order dated 13.11.2013 stands cancelled. The application stands disposed of. CRL.A. 776/2001 1. With the consent of parties, the appeal is taken up for hearing today. The date already fixed in the matter i.e. 17.12.2013 stands cancelled.1. Mukesh Kumar (the appellant) questions the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 12.09.2001 in Sessions Case No.81/98 arising out of FIR No.906/1997 registered at Police Station Kalkaji by which he was held guilty for committing offence under Section 397/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with fine `...
Dal Chand Vs. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
$~32 & 33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:22. d November, 2013 + W.P.(C) 7310/2013 DAL CHAND Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. S.S. Panwar, Adv. with Mr. Sunil Dutt Baloni, Adv. versus + GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Adv. for R-1, R-3 & R-4. Ms. Sangeeta Sondhi Adv. with Mr. Sanjeev Narula, Adv. for R-2. W.P.(C) 7311/2013 SMT. RAMWATI & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. S.S. Panwar, Adv. with Mr. Sunil Dutt Baloni, Adv. versus GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Adv. for R-1, R-3 & R-4. Ms. Sangeeta Sondhi Adv. with Mr. Sanjeev Narula, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL ORDER2211.2013 CM APPL.15724/2013 (exemption) in W.P.(C) 7310/2013 CM APPL.15727/2013 (exemption) in W.P.(C) 7311/2013 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 7310/2013 and CM APPL.15725/2013 (stay) 1. By virtue of this writ petition, the Petitioner...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »