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.
Ravneet Singh Vs. Parul Tandon
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2013
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: February 27, 2013 + FAO 110/2013 RAVNEET SINGH ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Pradeep Narula, Advocate with Ms.Prena Mehta, Advocate. versus PARUL TANDON ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Atul Jain, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG,J.(ORAL) CM No.3485/2013 Allowed; subject to just exceptions. FAO No.110/2013 1. Learned counsel appears for the respondent and states that he was the counsel for the respondent before the learned Judge, Family Court and the vakalatnama filed by him in said proceedings entitles and authorises him to appear for the respondent in the appeal as well.2. Impugned order disposes of an application filed by the respondent under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking to modify judgement and order dated November 18, 2009 and July 20, 2010. The impugned order notes the fact that when the warring couple sought divorce b...
Pradeep @ Sheru @ Sher Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : February 20, 2013 DECIDED ON : February 27, 2013 + CRL.A.150/2010 & Crl.M.A.No.8174/2011 PRADEEP @ SHERU @ SHER SINGH Through : ..... Appellant Ms.Rakhi Dubey, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. ASI Yashbir Singh, PS South Rohini, Delhi. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. The appellant Pradeep @ Sheru @ Sher Singh impugns judgment dated 11.09.2009 and order on sentence dated 24.09.2009 in Sessions Case No.85/2009 arising out of FIR No.903/2007 registered at Police Station Rohini by which he was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 363/366/376 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for ten years with total fine of `9,000/-.2. from The allegations against the accused were that on 28.09.2007 House No.46, MTNL Colony, Sector 3, Rohini, he kidnapped prosecutrix X (assumed name) and committed rape upon her for one month during her stay with him at Bateshwar. Stat...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. Madhushree Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:27. 02.2013 ITA 47/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI ... Appellant versus MADHUSHREE GUPTA ... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent : Mr Suruchi Aggarwal : Mr V. N. Jha CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This appeal is directed against the Tribunals order dated 25.05.2012 in ITA No. 1589/Del/2005 pertaining to the assessment year 2001-02. It arises out of the penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. A penalty of ` 18,79,303/- had been imposed upon the respondent. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the penalty, which had been deleted by the Tribunal by virtue of the impugned order.2. The Assessing Officer had noted that the assessee had claimed current years losses amounting to ` 80,65,000/- pertaining to the business of th...
Phool Chand and ors. Vs. I.R.C.C., New Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.3895/1999 % February 27, 2013 PHOOL CHAND & ORS. Through: .... Petitioners none. versus I.R.C.C., NEW DELHI & ANR. .... Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjiv K. Jha, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition qua the petitioner No.1 is dismissed adopting the reasoning of points 2 & 3 of the grounds urged on behalf of the respondents as given today while dismissing the WP(C) No.895/1997 titled as Rajiv Mahendru & Anr. Vs. Chairman-MD, I.R.C.C., New Delhi & Anr.. So far as the petitioner No. 2-Sh. Man Mohan Sharma is concerned, he has already given a letter which is filed as Annexure-A by the respondent No.1 to its counter affidavit whereby Sh.Man Mohan Sharma has said that he has taken VRS and therefore he is not interested in continuing the case and withdraws the petition.2. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed on merits so far as the petition...
Brig. P.J.S. Rangar and anr. Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:27. 02.2013 + W.P.(C) 4670/2008 BRIG. P.J.S.RANGAR &ANR. ..... Petitioners Through : Sh. S.M. Dalal, Advocate. versus UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Ruchir Mishra, Advocate. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The petitioners seek quashing of Department of Personnel and Training (DOP&T) Office Memorandum No. 22011/3/2007-Estt(D) dated 18.02.2008, and the letter No. A/23578/QASB 4 2007)/DGQA/Adm-4 of the Ministry of Defence, Department of Defence Production dated 15.05.2008. They also seek consequential direction for quashing of Empanelment Order issued on 16.06.2008.2. Briefly the material facts are that the petitioners were, at the relevant time in 2007, working as Brigadiers in the Indian Army. Pursuant to the normal selection modes, on 29.10.2007, a Committee considered various names of officials for promotion from the rank ...
Delhi Development Authority Vs. M/S Aeroshine
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:27. h February, 2013 % + CO.APP. NO.39/2004 & CM NO.14208/2004 (for Stay) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Sangeeta Chandra, Adv. Versus M/S AEROSHINE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. V.N. Kaura, Adv. with Ms. Paramjeet Benipal & Mr. Sumit Singh Benipal, Advs. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.This appeal under Section 483 of the Companies Act, 1956 is preferred by the appellant Delhi Development Authority (DDA) against the order dated 31.08.2004 of the learned Company Judge of this Court in CA No.504/1983 in CA No.358/1980 in CA No.161/1983 in CP No.78/1968 filed for winding up of M/s Globe Associates (P) Ltd. Though the complete chronology of facts is not available in the paper book of this appeal and inspite of records of CP No.78/1968 having been requisitioned, the files relating to CAs in which the orders impugned in this appeal were made were ...
State Vs. Avinash Oram Kujur
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2013
$~5 & 7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 193/2012 DIVYA ORAM KUJUR Through: ..... Petitioner Ms.Protima Parihar, Advocate versus STATE & ANR Through: + ..... Respondent Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State Mr.K.K.Malhotra, Advocate for R-2 CRL.REV.P. 379/2012 STATE ..... Petitioner Through: Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State versus AVINASH ORAM KUJUR Through: ..... Respondent Mr.K.K.Malhotra, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL ORDER % 27.02.2013 1. As per the allegations made by the prosecution, the Petitioner Divya Oram Kujur and the Respondent (Accused) Avnish Oram Kujur hailed from the State of Orissa.2. The Respondent (Accused) made the Petitioner to believe that he was not married and that he had a liking for her. In the year 2005, the Respondent (Accused) solemnized marriage with the Petitioner. After the marriage, the Petitioner had sexual relations with the Respondent.3. According to the Petitioner, even in July, 2010 she (the Petitioner) pr...
Tabita Chand Vs. Director of Education and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No. 7585/2008 with CM Nos.14666/2008 , 9225/2009 & 2463/2013 February 26, 2013 % TABITA CHAND Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Romy Chacko, Adv. versus DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Latika Dutta, Adv. for Mr. S.D. Salwan, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Azeem Samuel, Adv. for R-4. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner who was recommended to be appointed as a Principal by the Managing Committee of the respondent/school, M/s. B.M.Gange, Girls Senior Secondary School, and which school is represented by respondents No. 2 and 3.2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was recommended to be appointed as the Principal by the Managing Committee on 1.7.2008. By the said `meeting, the Managing Committee appointed the petitioner subject to approval of the Director of Education to the appointment of t...
Suresh Kumar Vs. Jai Ram and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:26. h February, 2013 MAC.A. 519/2009 SURESH KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. T.A. Francis and Mr.Mahesh Katyayen, Advs. Versus JAI RAM & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. M.L. Sharma, Adv. for R1. Mr. S.L. Gupta and Mr. Ram Ashray, Advs. for Insurance Company for R2. Mr. Sarul Jain, Adv. for R4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) + 1. MAC.APP. 519/2009 Instant appeal has been preferred against the award dated 15.05.2009 whereby ld. Tribunal while passing the award compensation has directed the appellant to pay the compensation amount, in addition to respondent no. 3 (driver) and respondent no. 4 (owner) of the offending vehicle.2. It is stated in the instant appeal that ld. Tribunal has erred in not taking into account the fact that the appellant had already transferred the vehicle on 03.04.2000 and the insurance policy on 11.04.2000 in the name of respondent no. 4, whereas, the accide...
M.G.Attri Vs. S. K. Jain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:26. h February, 2013 + CRL. M.C.2011/2007 M.G.ATTRI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.A.K.Panda, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Naveen Kumar Matta, Advocate versus S. K. JAIN Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr.Advocate with Mr.H.S.Bhullar & Mr.Ankit Aggarwal, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. By virtue of this Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the code), the Petitioner M.G.Attri (Chief Enforcement Officer) seeks setting aside of the order dated 26.11.1998 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (A.C.M.M.) in the Complaint Case No.75/1/1996 instituted by the Petitioner against the Respondent and one Mohd. Ameerudeen for an offence punishable under Section 8(1) read with Section 14 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (the FERA) whereby on an Application under Section 245 (2) of the Code, the Respondent was discharged on the...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »