Delhi Court August 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.
Narender Singh Salkan Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :9th May, 2013 Judgment delivered on:22. d August,2013 % + CRL.M.C. No. 2751/2007 & Crl. M.A. No. 9723/07 (for stay) NARENDER SINGH SALKAN Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Malavika Rajkotia and Mr.Chetanya Puri, Advocates with Petitioner in person. Versus STATE & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents SHO Rajender Gautam, P.S. Alipur for Respondent No.1. Mr.V.K.Malik, Mr. Rahul Raj Malik and Mr. Rajeev Chauhan, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.For detailed order see CRL.M.C. No. 1604/2007. SURESH KAIT, J.AUGUST 22 2013/sb...
M/S. Taneja Developers and Infrastructure Ltd. and Vs. the Official Li ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
$~1 & 2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:12. 07.2013 Decided on:22. 08.2013 + CO.APPL.26/2011, C.M. NO. 7989/2011 (for stay) M/S. TANEJA DEVELOPERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. AND ANR. ..... Appellants versus THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR AND ORS...... Respondents + CO.APPL.27-29/2011, C.M. APPL.8046/2011 (for stay), C.M. APPL.8728/2012 (Under Order I Rule 10), C.M. APPL.8729/2012 (for exemption), C.M. APPL.8730/2012 (Under Order I Rule10) & C.M. APPL.8731/2012 (for exemption) DELHI AUTOMOBILES LTD. ..... Appellant versus THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR AND ANR...... Respondents Appearance: Sh. Bhanoo Sood, Advocate, for Appellant No.1 in Item No.1. Sh. Girdhar Govind with Ms. Priyanka Kalra, Advocates, for Resp. No.2 in Item No.1 and for appellant in Item No.2. Ms. Kajal Chandra, Ms. Renu Kuhar and Ms. Swati Sinha, Advocates, for Resp. No.2 in Item Nos. 1 and 2. Sh. Rajiv Behl and Sh. Manish Bishnoi, Advocates, for Official Liquidator. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HO...
Geetanjalei Singh and anr. Vs. Mrigendra Pritam Vikramsingh Steiner an ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. 08.2013 Decided on :22. 08.2013 + FAO (OS) 30/2013 JASWINDER SINGH ..... Appellant versus MRIGENDRA PRITAM VIKRAMSINGH STEINER & ORS ..... Respondents + FAO (OS) 31/2013 GEETANJALEI SINGH & ANR ..... Appellants versus MRIGENDRA PRITAM VIKRAMSINGH STEINER & ORS ..... Respondents Appearance: Mr. Arun Khosla with Ms. Shreeanka Kakkar, Advocates for appellants. Mr. A.K. Vali with Mr. Ramesh N. Keswani and Mr. Tuhin, Advocates for respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT % For detailed judgment, the decision dated 22.08.2013 in FAO(OS) 684/2010 may be referred to. S. RAVINDRA BHAT (JUDGE) NAJMI WAZIRI (JUDGE) AUGUST 22 2013 FAO(OS)30/13 & FAO(OS) 31/13 Page 1...
The Yachting Association of India Vs. Boardsailing Association of Indi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:22. 08.2013 LPA 523/2013 THE YACHTING ASSOCIATION OF INDIA ..... Appellant versus BOARDSAILING ASSOCIATION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... .Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr Amit Sinha, Mr Ajit Warrier, Mr Aman Gandhi, Ms Tarunima Vijra & Ms Salmoli Choudhuri. For the Respondent : Mr Rahul Mehra for R-1 to 12. Mr Amrit Pal Singh, CGSC for R-13. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J 1.The appellant has preferred the present appeal challenging the interim order dated 15.07.2013 passed by a learned Single Judge in CM No. 5409/2013 in W.P.(C) No. 2062/2013. The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned order as the learned Single Judge has stayed the process for the election of Council members of the appellant association and has directed that the ballot box be preserved without openi...
S. Shankar and anr. Vs. M/S Rama Panels Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % I.A. No.13085/2011 in CS(OS) 518/2010 Date of Decision:22. d August, 2013 + # S. SHANKAR & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. N. Srinivasan, Attorney VERSUS $ * M/S RAMA PANELS PVT. LTD. & ORS.. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.BHASIN ORDER P.K.BHASIN, J: The defendant no.1 had taken on leave and license basis the suit premises in Greater Kailash-II from the plaintiffs for the residence of defendant no.2, one of its Directors. However, the defendants started using the suit premises without the permission of the plaintiffs for commercial purposes. Upon the expiry of the license period on 07/08/2008, the defendants did not vacate the suit premises and so the plaintiffs filed a suit for possession and mesne profits etc. In that suit an application under Order II Rule 2 the Code of Civil Procedure(C.P.C. in short) was also filed seeking leave of the Court to file a suit subsequently for cla...
Rajender Kumar Sharma Vs. Moti Ram and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:22nd August, 2013 MAC.APP. 1090/2012 RAJENDER KUMAR SHARMA ..... Appellant Through: Mr.P.K. Malik and Mr. N.P. Joshi, Advs. versus MOTI RAM & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, Adv. with Mr. Harish Sharma, ALO. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is preferred against the impugned award dated 10.07.2012 passed by the Ld. Tribunal whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,47,600/- as compensation with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till realization. Vide the present appeal, the appellant has sought enhancement of the compensation amount.2. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued only on the issue that the age of the deceased at the time of accident was 20 years whereas Ld. Tribunal has considered the age of the father and applied 8 as the multiplier.3. The law has been settled on the issue whether the ...
Smt Harkishan Kaur and ors. Vs. Manoj Ahuja and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:22nd August, 2013 % + MAC.APP. 353/2012 SMT HARKISHAN KAUR & ORS. ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Vinay Sabharwal and Ms.Neha Sabharwal, Advocates. Versus MANOJ AHUJA & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Respondent No. 1 in person. Ms.Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate for Respondent No.2/Insurance Company. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM No. 5950/2012 (for delay) 1. Vide the instant application, the applicants/appellants are seeking condonation of delay of 381 days in filing the instant appeal.2. Present application is filed by the applicant/appellant No.2, widow of the deceased Gurminder Singh who died at the age of 41 years in the accident took place on 18.08.2006. The impugned award was passed on 20.11.2010. Thereafter, though the applicant pursued the matter with the advocate concerned, however, the instant appeal is filed belatedly.3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants/appell...
G.S. Engineering and Construction Corporation Vs. Deputy Director of I ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Writ Petition (Civil) No. 6966/2007 Reserved on:9. h July, 2013 Date of Decision:22. d August, 2013 % G.S. ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION ....Petitioner Through Mr.Salil Kapur with Mr. Vikas Jain, Advocates. Versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1 2) INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI & ORS. Respondents Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Puneet Gupta, Standing Counsel. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.G.S. Engineering & Construction Corporation (formally known as LG Engineering & Construction Corporation) by this writ petition challenges validity of the reassessment notice dated 29th March, 2007 for assessment year 2002-03, which was issued under Section 148 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for short). As the objections filed by the petitioner to the reassessment notice stand dismissed vide order dated 23rd August, 2007, the ...
Bala Krishan and anr. Vs. C.P. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
$~R-89 & 90 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: August 22, 2013 + W.P.(C) 2091/2002 KRISHAN KUMAR & ANR. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.Anil Singal, Advocate versus C.P. & ORS. Represented by: + ..... Respondents Ms.Ruchi Sindhwani, Advocate W.P.(C) 2145/2002 BALA KRISHAN & ANR. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.Anil Singal, Advocate versus C.P. & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Ruchi Sindhwani, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Original record of inquiry perused.3. Relevant facts to be noted are that on August 20, 1996, Inspector Satyaveer submitted a report to the ACP, Public Grievances W.P.(C) 2091/2002 & W.P.(C) 2145/2002 1 of 11 Cell, Delhi Police, recording therein that on August 19, 1996, he had made a surprise check of the staff posted at Ghazipur Check Post at 11.30 p.m. and had noted that Ct.Krishan Kumar ha...
Sh. Ram Dass Vs. Bses Yamuna Power Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No. 7638/2005 22nd August , 2013 SH. RAM DASS Through: ......Petitioner Mr. N.S.Dalal and Mr. H.L.Verma, Advocates. VERSUS BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD. & ANR. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. S.N.Choudhari, Mr. Anjan Sinha and Ms. Shruti Choudhri, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. In this writ petition, petitioner seeks promotion in terms of office order dated 19.7.2003 of the employer. Petitioner also seeks his time bound promotion in terms of the Resolution 216 dated 16.7.1997 and office order dated 23.7.1997.2. Petitioner admittedly took voluntary retirement under a VRS Scheme. Petitioner on taking voluntary retirement which was effective from 30.12.2003, received all his dues from the employer. When the dues were received by the petitoner on taking voluntary retirement, petitioner did not reserve any rights for taking any further dues. Petitioner the...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »