Delhi Court September 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.
Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-i Vs. M/S Samtel India Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
$~Part-IIB (R-40) * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI INCOME TAX APPEAL No.130/2000 Date of decision:26. h September, 2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, Delhi-I ..... Appellant Through Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel & Mr. Ruchesh Sinha, Advocate. versus M/S SAMTEL INDIA LIMITED ..... 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 1995-96, was admitted for hearing vide order dated 30th January, 2001 on the following substantial questions of law:(i) Whether ITAT was justified in not deciding the issue which was before it namely whether Rs.3,95,11,874/- being the excise duty on raw material consumed during the year is allowable u/s. 37(1) as claimed by the respondent before A.O.?. (ii) Whether the assessee is entitled to MODVAT credit on account of excess of excise duty/additional customs duty, paid by it on purchase of raw material, ov...
Parmanand Lal Vs. Uoi, Through Secretary, Department of Telecommunic
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
$~R-8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3227/2006 % 26.09.2013 PARMANAND LAL Through: ..... Petitioner Petitioner in person versus UOI, THROUGH SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. R.V. Sinha, Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocates 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, petitioner seeks relief of grant of Rs.50 lakhs as damages as also another amount of Rs.10 lakhs as exemplary damages. The prayer clause of the writ petition reads as under :A gracious writ of mandamus may kindly be issued to the respondents to pay the petitioner damages of a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs (Rupees fifty lakhs only) towards mental agony, loss of earning capacity of petitioners dependents and expenditure incurred even after final judgment and the loss in value of the amount due to delay with 12 percent interest from the date of filing this petition, OR, may pass any other order in ...
icici Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Rani Mishra and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:26. h September, 2013 MAC.APP. 17/2012 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv. versus RANI MISHRA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: NEMO. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 19.10.2011, whereby ld. Tribunal has granted compensation for a sum of Rs.13,12,900/- with interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of the petition till realization.2. Ld. Counsel has argued on two grounds, firstly; ld. Tribunal has added 50% future prospects. However, keeping in view the dictum of Apex court in Rajesh and Ors. Vs. Rajbir Singh and Ors. 2013 (6) SCALE 563 present ground is not available to the appellant.3. The second ground raised by the counsel for the appellant is that ld. Tribunal has wrongly assessed the age of the deceased as 25 years without any documentary proof. However as per the C...
Vijender @ Bhatti Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :26. h September, 2013 + CRL.A. 332/1999 VIJENDER @ BHATTI ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Deepak Tyagi with Mr.Anis Hashmi, Advocates. VERSUS STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Vijender @ Bhatti (the appellant) was convicted under Section 307 IPC by a judgment dated 27.02.1999 arising out of FIR No.267/1995 registered at Police Station Mandir Marg for attempting to murder Rakesh on 23.07.1995 at 04.30 P.M. on the roof of House No.36, Lady Harding Compound. The prosecution sent Vijender @ Bhatti and Vinod Kumar @ Tinku for trial. However, on appreciating the evidence and after considering the contentions of the parties, the Trial Court acquitted Vinod Kumar of all the charges. The appellant was sentenced to undergo RI for four and a half years with fine `2,500/-. Being aggrieved Vijender @ Bhatti has preferred the appeal.2. During the course of arguments, ...
Shyam Lal Vs. State N.C.T. of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :25. h SEPTEMBER, 2013 DECIDED ON :26. h SEPTEMBER, 2013 + CRL.A. 395/2001 SHYAM LAL ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Sumeet Verma, Advocate. versus STATE N.C.T. OF DELHI Through : ..... Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Shyam Lal (the appellant) challenges his conviction in Sessions Case No.17/2000 arising out of FIR No.21/95 PS Rajender Nagar by which he was held guilty for committing offence punishable under Section 489B IPC. By an order dated 17.05.2001, he was sentenced to undergo RI for four years with fine ` 500/-.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on 03.02.1995 at 04.00 P.M. at Sethi Petrol Pump, Gangaram Marg, Old Rajender Nagar, he used two forged counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of ` 100 each as genuine to get petrol at the Petrol Pump. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded after lodging First Information Report on complain...
Leela Builders Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Sunita Sinha and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:26. 09.2013 FAO(OS) 149/2013 LEELA BUILDERS PVT. LTD. & ORS. ..... Appellants Versus SUNITA SINHA & ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellants : For the Respondents : Mr Raghavendra M. Bajaj and Mr Arun Batra Mr Ravi Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr P.S. Bindra, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr Udayaditya Banerjee, Mr P.B. Suresh and Mr Vipin Nair, Advocates for respondent No.3 CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 17.01.2013 passed by a learned Single Judge in I.A No.766/2013 in CS(OS) No.2162/2008. The said application was filed under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC read with Section 151 CPC for punishing respondent No.1 / plaintiff No.1 and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 / defendants No.9 and 10 for wilful disobedience of the order dated 25.02.2002 and for consequential di...
Tanu Sharma Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:23. d August, 2013 Pronounced on:26. h September, 2013 + CRL.M.C. 3581/2011 TANU SHARMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, Advocate with Mr. Rana Parveen Siddiqui, Advocate & Mohd. Qamar, Advocate along with Petitioner in person. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State/ R-1 with Ms. Nidhi Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sunil K. Mittal, Adv. with Mr. Kshitij Mittal, Adv., Mr. Saurabh Balwani, Adv., Mr. Anshul Mittal, Adv. & Ms. Vaishali Mittal, Adv. for R-2 along with Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. This Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(Code) is directed against an order dated 13.07.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) whereby Criminal Revision Petition No.35/2010 filed by Akshod Kumar Sharma (Respondent No.2) was allowed to the extent that Respondent No.2 was ...
Joginder @ Virender Sharma Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:20. h September, 2013 Pronounced on:26. h September, 2013 + CRL.A. 1113/2012 JOGINDER @ VIRENDER SHARMA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sunil Kapoor, Advocate with Ms. Sudha, Advocate. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. The dilemma in the instant appeal which arises out of a judgment dated 06.08.2012 and order on sentence dated 07.08.2012 passed in Sessions case No.48/2010 whereby the Appellant was convicted under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) is whether the Appellant really attempted to commit rape on the prosecutrix G, a small girl of eight years or it was merely a sexual assault.2. On 21.02.2010 at about 8:37 P.M., DD No.31-A was recorded in Police Station (PS) Nihal Vihar to the effect that one Rajender Singh, son of Late Harnam Singh had informed that his neighbour V...
The New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Phool Wati and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:26. h September, 2013 MAC.APP. 284/2013 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. K.K. Bhat, Adv. Versus PHOOL WATI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Tushar Sinha, Adv. for R1 Mr. Tom Joseph, Adv. for R2. Mr. Ajit Rajput, Adv. for R3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 20.12.2012, whereby ld. Tribunal has granted compensation as under:1. Treatment Expenses 2.Pain & Suffering 3.Diet & Conveyance 4.Attendants Charges 5.Loss of Income 6. Disability Total 2. Rs.68,837/Rs. 50,000/Rs.45,000/Rs.16,703/Rs.38,499/Rs.2,69,493/- - Rs.4,88,532/- Mr. Bhat, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the policy issued in favour of the respondent No.2 was cancelled w.e.f. 03.01.2003. Therefore, the appellant/insurance company was not liable to pay any compensation.3. He further submitted th...
Wing. Cdr. A.K. Saxena Vs. Pawan Hans Helicopters Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.5321/ 1999 26th September, 2013 % WING. CDR. A.K. SAXENA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Abhay Singh Kushwaha, Advocate with Ms. Abhigya Kushwaha, Advocate. Versus PAWAN HANS HELICOPTERS LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S.K. Taneja, Senior Advocate with Mr. Puneet Taneja, 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 by invoking the doctrine of equal pay for equal work, seeks grant of pay and allowances which are granted to the regular pilots of respondent/Pawan Hans Helicopters Ltd.2. It is settled law that in order to invoke and apply the doctrine of equal pay for equal work at least the following requirements must be pleaded and shown to exist:(i) The parity is claimed by the petitioner with a particular person/post. (ii) What are the qualifications of the person/post with whom/which parity is claimed and that the pet...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »