Delhi Court February 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.
Cit Vs. Suresh Nanda
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + + + Judgment delivered on:25. 02.2013 ITA 85/2013 ITA 100/2013 ITA 87/2013 CIT ... Appellant versus SURESH NANDA ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent : Mr Sanjeev Rajpal : Mr C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. with Mr Ajay Wadhwa, Mr Sandeep Kapur, Mr Laksh Khanna, Ms Rohini Musa, Mr Govind Singh Grewal, Advs. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. These appeals have been filed by the revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and they pertain to the assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04. All these appeals arise out of the common order passed by the Tribunal on 24.07.2012 in ITA Nos. 1428, 1429 and 1430/Del/2012.2. The main issue that is sought to be raised in these appeals is with regard to the residential status of the respondent/assessee. According to the learned couns...
Cit Vs. Suresh Nanda
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + + + Judgment delivered on:25. 02.2013 ITA 85/2013 ITA 100/2013 ITA 87/2013 CIT ... Appellant versus SURESH NANDA ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent : Mr Sanjeev Rajpal : Mr C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. with Mr Ajay Wadhwa, Mr Sandeep Kapur, Mr Laksh Khanna, Ms Rohini Musa, Mr Govind Singh Grewal, Advs. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. These appeals have been filed by the revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and they pertain to the assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04. All these appeals arise out of the common order passed by the Tribunal on 24.07.2012 in ITA Nos. 1428, 1429 and 1430/Del/2012.2. The main issue that is sought to be raised in these appeals is with regard to the residential status of the respondent/assessee. According to the learned couns...
Balbir Singh Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : February 08, 2013 Judgment Pronounced on : February 25, 2013 + WP(C) 4560/2012 BALBIR SINGH .....Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Sourabh Ahuja, Advocate. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.P.Pankaj, proxy counsel for Mr.Sumit Chander, Advocate for R-1 to R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Petitioner, ASI Balbir Singh and Ct.Mohandas had faced a joint inquiry when summary of allegation was served upon the two on January 25, 2008 alleging that on November 02, 2007 when en-route to the Office of the DCP (North-East), Insp.Hira Lal and SI Pawan Kumar Thakur crossed ISBT at around 04:50 PM and found three light commercial vehicles bearing not DL-1L-4253, DL-1LA-7884 and HR-465239 parked on the roadside and saw one ZO (the petitioner) and one Constable prosecuting the commercial vehicles. The two officers took position ...
Union of India Vs. M/S Uttam Singh Duggal and Co. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on: February 25, 2013 + O.M.P. No.174/2013 UNION OF INDIA Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv. with Mr.Rajeshwar Rao and Ms.Nandita Abrol, Advs. versus M/S UTTAM SINGH DUGGAL & CO. & ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr.Ram K. Watel, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) I.A. No.3146/2013 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. I.A.No.3148/2013 (for condonation of delay of 89 days in filing the petition) 1. This is an application filed by the petitioner for condonation of delay of 89 days in filing the petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against the award dated 18th August, 2012.2. The main petition is filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as Act) challenging the Award dated 18th August, 2012 passed by the learned sole Arbitrator Justice K....
Union of India Vs. Kamla Prasad Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : February 15,, 2013 Judgment Pronounced on : February 25, 2013 + WP(C) 8107/2012 UNION OF INDIA ...Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Amit Chadha, Advocate. versus KAMLA PRASAD SINGH ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Yashpal Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. On November 8, 1994 a charge memo was issued to the respondent recording Presidential sanction to do so; and as per AnnexureI, three Articles of Charge were alleged : (I) While functioning as Divisional Engineer (Plg.- III)/AGM (Plg. & Dev.) in Kanpur Telecom District during the period September 9, 1991 to November 24, 1992 respondent negotiated a contract for laying underground cables and awarded the same to M/s Unemployed Engineers Constructions where his son Brijesh Singh was employed and this amounted to misusing the official position. The conduct was alleged to be a grave misconduc...
Jai Bhagwan Mittal Vs. Meena JaIn and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
$~9 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA 508/2012 Judgment reserved on 20th February, 2013 Judgement delivered on 25th February, 2013 % JAI BHAGWAN MITTAL Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Dinesh Gupta and Mr. Vikas Mishra, Advs. Versus MEENA JAIN AND ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. B.B. Gupta and Mr. Vijay Kr. Goyal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K. PATHAK, J.1. On an application under Order 12 Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short hereinafter referred to as the Code) filed by the respondents trial court, vide order dated 17 th November, 2012, has passed a decree of possession against the appellant while keeping the proceedings in the suit alive with regard to determination of mesne profit.2. Aggrieved by the decree of possession appellant has preferred this appeal.3. Briefly stated, facts relevant for the disposal of the present appeal are that respondents filed a suit for possession in respect of property bearing no. A-6/1, Jhilmil Industri...
Shatrudhan Kumar Vs. Ggsip University and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
$~53. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1163/2013 & CM 2202/2013 % Judgment dated 25.02.2013 SHATRUDHAN KUMAR Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.Tungesh, Mr.Umesh K. Burnwal and Mr.Akhand Pratap Singh, Advs. versus GGSIP UNIVERSITY AND ANR ..... Respondents Through : Mr.Mukul Talwar and Mr.S.Mohapatra, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents to reevaluate his answer sheet after eliminating the questions falling out of the syllabus in the supplementary examination of B-Tech Course ECE Branch, fourth semester, for the subject, Communication System and Circuit-I, conducted by the respondents on 3.11.2012.2. As per the petition, in the year 2008 the petitioner appeared in the entrance examination i.e. IPCET, conducted by the respondent no.1/University, wherein he secured the rank of 5183. The petitioner was o...
Puran Chand Vs. Brij Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + R.S.A. NO.16 OF 200.Decided on :25. h February, 2013 PURAN CHAND Through: Appellant Mr. P.K.Gulia, Advocate. Versus BRIJ LAL Through: Respondent Mr.Manoj, proxy counsel CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. Both the learned counsel for the appellant as well as proxy counsel for the respondent pray for an adjournment on the ground that the parties are trying to settle the matter.2. The request of the learned counsel for the parties for adjournment cannot be allowed on account of the fact that this is a regular second appeal pending for the last more than 12 years without formulating any substantial question of law.3. The learned counsel for the parties have failed to assist the Court in formulating any substantial question of law purported to be arising from the said regular second appeal.4. The substantial question of law which is purported to have been formulated in the appeal is as under: Whether the ADJ erred in not appreci...
Parshottam Sarup Aggarwal(H.U.F) Vs. Dena Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 398/2010 PARSHOTTAM SARUP AGGARWAL(H.U.F) ..... Plaintiff Through Mr. Amit Khemka with Mr. Rishi Sehgal and Ms. Sanorita D. Bharali, Advocates versus DENA BANK Through ..... Defendant Mr. Arun Aggarwal, Advocate % Date of Decision:25. h February, 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J I.A. 10162/2012 IN CS(OS) 398/2010 1. Present application has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 151 read with Order 12 Rule 6 CPC.2. The relevant facts of the present case are that plaintiff is the owner and landlord of the suit property bearing No. M-36, Connaught Circus, New Delhi admeasuring 3362 sq. ft. approx. consisting of ground floor and mezzanine.3. A lease deed dated 11th May, 2001 was executed between the parties and registered on 15th May, 2001 at a monthly rent of Rs. 2,35,340/- that means Rs. 70 per sq.ft. per month plus two-third share of property tax plus all taxes. The aforesaid lease was renewable for a ...
A.K.Sacheti Vs. National Council of Educational Research and Trainin
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:25. 02.2013 W.P.(C) 8489/2011 A.P.VERMA ..... Petitioner versus NATIONAL COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH & TRAINING ..... Respondent AND W.P.(C) 8491/2011 A.K.SACHETI ..... Petitioner versus NATIONAL COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH & TRAINING ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in these cases: For the Petitioners : Mr Manu Mridul with Mr Anant K.Vatsya and Ms Priyanka Singh. For the Respondent : Mr R.K.Singh with Ms Deepa Rai and Ms Reena Chongtham. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.1. These two petitions assail the common judgment and order dated 10.11.2010 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal) in OA No.1160/2010 and OA No.1168/2010 whereby the Tribunal dismissed the original applications of the petitioners.2. Since the above petitions raise common issues, this common Judgment shall dispose of the afor...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »