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.
Shahi Exports Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. Cmd Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:12. h September, 2013 Date of Decision:18. h September, 2013 % + CO. PET. 468/2011 SHAHI EXPORTS PVT. LTD. & ANOTHER ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Sr.Advocate, with Ms. Neelima Tripathi. versus CMD BUILDTECH PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Chhabra with Mr.Vaibhav Jairaj, Advocate CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR JUDGMENT R.V. EASWAR, J.:1. By order dated 10.07.2013 the preliminary objections raised by the respondent to the maintainability of the company petition were rejected and the company petition was admitted.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the order passed by this Court on 10.07.2013, it is evident that the respondent is unable to pay its debts. He, therefore, contends that this is a fit case for appointment of provisional liquidator and for winding-up of the company. Reliance is placed on the judgment of this Court in Niti International Ltd. vs. Shree Sagarmatha...
Anand Tewari Vs. Union of India and Ors,
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:18. 09.2013 W.P.(C) 3885/2013 ANAND TEWARI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Madhav Khurana, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS, Through: + W.P.(C) 5153/2013 P.K. TEWARI Through: versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. Saqib, Mr. Akshay Chandra, Advs. for UOI ..... Petitioner Mr. Madhav Khurana, Adv. ..... Respondent Ms. Shipra Shukla, Adv. for R1&2 W.P.(C) 5155/2013 ABHISHEK TEWARI Through: versus ..... Petitioner Mr. Madhav Khurana, Adv. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Shipra Shukla, Adv. for R1&2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(ORAL) The petitioner in W.P(C) No.3885/2013 holds a passport bearing number Z2038840 which came to be seized by the CBI in connection with a criminal case registered vide RC not BD1/2012/E/0001-BS&FC. Vide show cause notice dated 14.3.2012, the Regional Passport Officer (RPO) called upon the petitioner to show cause as to why his passpor...
Mohd Hanif Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON + :18. h September, 2013. CRL.A.1261/2011 MOHD HANIF Through : ....Appellant Mr.Sunil Mehta, Advocate. VERSUS STATE Through : .Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. The appellant-Mohd.Hanif challenges correctness of the judgment dated 26.04.2011 in Sessions Case No.105/2006 arising out of FIR No.43/2003 PS Sarai Rohilla Railway Station by which he was convicted for committing offences punishable under Section 29/21 (c) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as NDPS Act). Vide an order dated 12.05.2011, he was sentenced to undergo RI for 20 years with fine ` 2 lacs for each offence.2. Raj Kumar Mehta, Pradeep Kumar Chawla @ Chhottu, Harjinder Singh @ Jinda, Inder Singh, Mohd.Hanif (the appellant herein) and Harley were charge-sheeted under Sections 21/23/24/29 of NDPS Act on the allegations that on or before 20.09.2003, they entered into a c...
Savitri Devi Vs. Manoj Kumar and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on :12. 08.2013 Judgment Pronounced on:18. 09.2013 + CS(OS) 910/2011 SAVITRI DEVI Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Biswajit Swain, Advocate with Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate Versus MAnot KUMAR & ANR Through ..... Defendant Mr.Rakesh Dahiya, Advocate for D-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. The present suit is filed by the plaintiff for possession of the property being 1st Floor, House not T-279, Indira Colony, Narela, Delhi as per the rough site plan, Annexure P 1 and for mandatory injunction. Defendant No.1 is the son and defendant No.2 is the daughter-in-law of the plaintiff. As per the plaint, both the defendants are illegally and unauthorisedly occupying the first floor of the suit property comprising of four rooms, open space, one kitchen and two bathrooms and balconies.2. It is stated that the father-in-law of the plaintiff executed a Will dated 15.05.2006 in favour of the plaintiff whereby he bequeathe...
Naresh Chand Singhal Vs. Ndpl
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
6,7, 10, 15 & 16 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5339/2010 NARESH CHAND SINGHAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate. versus NDPL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. With 7. + W.P.(C) 8533/2009 JAGDEEP SINGH TALWAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate. versus NORTH DELHI POWER LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. With 10. + W.P.(C) 13630/2009 INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate. versus NORTH DELHI POWER LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. With 15. + W.P.(C) 799/2011 NEM CHAND AGGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate. versus NDPL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. And 16. + W.P.(C) 905/2011 KASHMIRI LAL VOHRA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate. versus NDPL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. Date of Decision:18. h September, 2013. % CORAM: HON'B...
international Corporation Vs. North Delhi Power Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
6,7, 10, 15 & 16 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5339/2010 NARESH CHAND SINGHAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate. versus NDPL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. With 7. + W.P.(C) 8533/2009 JAGDEEP SINGH TALWAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate. versus NORTH DELHI POWER LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. With 10. + W.P.(C) 13630/2009 INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate. versus NORTH DELHI POWER LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. With 15. + W.P.(C) 799/2011 NEM CHAND AGGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate. versus NDPL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. And 16. + W.P.(C) 905/2011 KASHMIRI LAL VOHRA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate. versus NDPL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate. Date of Decision:18. h September, 2013. % CORAM: HON'B...
Sh. Raj Singh Rathee Vs. the Chairman Dvb Pension and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.339/2011 % SH. RAJ SINGH RATHEE Through:18. h September, 2013 ..... Petitioner Mr. Somvir Singh Deswal, Advocate. versus THE CHAIRMAN DVB PENSION & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, Advocate for Pension Trust. Mr. S.N. Choudhri, Advocate for respondent Nos.2,3 and 5. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The only relief which is claimed before me on behalf of the petitioner is entitlement to claim pension because a period of 19 years, 9 months and 90 days should be taken as a period of 20 years of qualifying service as per Rule 49 of the CCS Pension Rules.2. An identical issue has been decided by me in the case of Smt. Pawan Vohra Vs. The Chairman, DVB Pension Trust and Anr. in W.P.(C) No.1680/2012 decided on 17.5.2013. In the present case like in the case of B as it existed on the date of retirement of the petitioner, and therefore for this...
Marc Bathing Luxuries Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission and an ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
$~18 &19. *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.1900/2013 Date of decision:18. h September, 2013 MARC BATHING LUXURIES LTD. ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Kaanan Kapur, Advocate. versus INCOME TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION & ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel. WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.1921/2013 MARC SANITATION PRIVATE LTD. ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Kaanan Kapur, Advocate. versus INCOME TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION & ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): Marc Bathing Luxuries Limited and Marc Sanitation Private Limited, the two sister concerns, have invoked writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India to question common order dated 1st March, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission under Section 245D(2C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short). As the fa...
Deepak Sapra Vs. Punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:18. 09.2013 + LPA 693/2013 DEEPAK SAPRA ..... Appellant Through : Sh. K.G. Mishra, Advocate. versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ..... Respondent Through : Sh. Rajat Arora, Advocate. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. Issue notice. Sh. Rajat Arora, Advocate accepts notice. With consent, the appeal is heard finally.2. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by an order of the learned Single Judge dated 18.07.2013 by which his claim for leave encashment benefit upon his compulsory retirement imposed by the respondent bank as a penalty was directed to be withheld/forfeited. Both the parties had relied upon Regulation 38 of the Punjab National Bank Officers Service Regulations, 1979, [hereafter referred to as the 1979 Regulations]., framed in terms of Section 19 (1) of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 [hereafter referr...
Atal Bihari Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
$~ 3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5622/2013 & CM No.12449/2013 % Date of decision:18. h September, 2013 ATAL BIHARI Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. Satish Chand and Mr. Sarbendra Kumar, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through : ..... Respondents Ms. Barkha Babbar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO GITA MITTAL, J.(Oral) 1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 9th April, 2013 whereby the mercy petition made by the petitioner has been rejected. The petitioner also assails the prior order dated 18th July, 2006 passed by the Summary Security Force Court (SSFC hereafter) whereby the petitioner was found guilty of commission of offence punishable under Section 46 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 and the sentence awarding dismissal from service. WP(C) No.5622/2013 page 1 o2. The petitioner was recruited as Constable in the Border Security Force on the 24th of March, 1993. In the y...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »