Delhi Court January 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 13 of about 723 results (0.009 seconds)T.P.Karunkaran Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
#60-61 $~ * 60. + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 7159/2012 K.SAROJINI Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Mohit Mathur with Mr. D.K. Mathur, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari, CGSC with Mr. Raujyot Singh, Advocate for UOI. Mr. Yeeshu Jain with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for R-3/Asst. Collector. AND61 + W.P.(C) 7160/2012 & CM APPL. 18485/2012 T.P.KARUNKARAN Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Mohit Mathur with Mr. D.K. Mathur, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, CGSC with Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate for UOI. % Date of Decision :28. h January, 2014 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present writ petitions have been filed seeking quashing of the orders dated 20th November, 2003 passed by Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement under The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 imposing penalty of Rs. 50 lacs on each of the petitioners.2. Mr. Mohit ...
Tag this Judgment!Shakir Vs. the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
$-19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :28. h JANUARY, 2014 + CRL.A. 138/2011 & CRL.M.A. 1495/2014 SHAKIR Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Bhupesh Narula, Advocate with Mr.Ashikesh Gupta, Advocate. VERSUS THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. Shakir (the appellant) has filed the present appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C. to challenge his conviction by a judgment dated 12.07.2010 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.02/09 arising out of FIR No.36/07 PS Seelampur by which he was held perpetrator of the crime under Sections 397/411 IPC and 25/27 Arms Act. By an order on sentence dated 15.07.2010, he was awarded RI for seven years with fine ` 5,000/- under Section 392 IPC read with Section 397 IPC; RI for three years with fine ` 1,000/- under Section 27 Arms Act. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.2. On 26.01.2007 at about 07.00 A.M., ASI Prem S...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Sh. Basant Lal JaIn and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h January, 2014 % + MAC.APP.No.825/2012 & CM No.12966/2012 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate. Versus SH. BASANT LAL JAIN & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP.No.825/2012 1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 21.03.2012, whereby while awarding the compensation, the learned Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs.11,000/- towards lawyers fee.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company submits that in the case of ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kanti Devi & Ors., MAC.A. 645/2012 decided on 30.07.2012, this Court has held that the Tribunal has no power to grant lawyers fee and out of pocket expenses.3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1/claimant submits that he...
Tag this Judgment!M/S New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Mohan Lal Grover and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h January, 2014 % + MAC.APP.No.325/2006 M/S NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate. Versus MOHAN LAL GROVER & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 23.01.2006, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation for a sum of Rs.1,18,224/- with interest at the rate of 5.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has argued the instant appeal only on the ground that the respondent No.1, i.e., driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid driving licence on the date of the accident, i.e., 08.10.2003. Despite that, in para-16 of the impugned order, the learne...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Ram Ishwar Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:28. h January, 2014 + MAC.APP.No.754/2011 & CM No.15711/2011 (for stay) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. Versus RAM ISHWAR SINGH & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr. Arvind Kumar Patel, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 6. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP.No.754/2011 1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 07.06.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.10,26,872/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has argued that the deceased Ajit Singh had not died due to the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle as there was contributory negligence on his part too.3. Brief facts of the case are that on 1...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Colorband Dyestuff Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/S Hotz Industries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:28. 01.2014 CO.PET. 201/2013 M/S. COLORBAND DYESTUFF PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner versus M/S HOTZ INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Nitin S. Tambwekar, Mr Seshatalpa Sai Bawdarv and Mr Avinash Joshi. For the Respondent : Mr Pravir K Jain. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J (ORAL) 1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner under Section 433 (e) of the Companies Act, 1956 alleging that the respondent company is unable to pay its debts as the respondent has failed and neglected to pay the invoices raised by the petitioner for the goods supplied by the petitioner to the respondent. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had supplied certain dyes from time to time to the respondent company who is engaged in the business of, inter alia, dying yarn for its customers. Accordingly, the petitioner is claiming that a sum of `5,60,562/- i...
Tag this Judgment!Shamshad @ Bhura and anr. Vs. State (Govt. of Nct, Delhi)
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:28. 01.2014 + CRL. A. No.1357 of 2010 SHAMSHAD @ BHURA & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Ankur Sood, Adv. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT, DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGEMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) Though Mr.Ankur Sood, Advocate appears only for the appellant Shamshad, since the other appellant is in custody and is not represented by a counsel, he is appointed as Amicus Curiae for him. On 14.3.2008, SI Tulsi Ram of P.S. Sadar Bazaar was on patrol with other police officials around Bara Tooti Chowk. When they reached Gali Toliye Wali, Paan Mandi at about 8:05 p.m., two (2) boys carrying countrymade pistols in their hands were seen running. One of them was carrying a small black colour bag in his hand. Those boys were being chased by persons from public. On seeing the police officials, the boys carrying country-made pistols in their hands threatened to shoot them. ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Tara Vs. the State (Govt. of Nct) Delhi
Court: Delhi
$-2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :28. h JANUARY, 2014 + CRL.A. 791/2012 MOHD. TARA Through : ..... Appellant Ms.S.Roy, Proxy Counsel for Ms. Nandita Rao, Advocate. VERSUS THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. Mohd. Tara (the appellant) impugns the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 14.11.2011 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.34/10 arising out of FIR No.28/08 PS Chandni Chowk by which he was convicted for committing offence under Section 392/34 IPC. By an order on sentence dated 29.11.2011, he was awarded RI for five years with fine ` 20,000/-.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on or before 18.02.2008, he along with his associates Mohd.Yasin, Mohd. Mustafa, Noor Mohd., Ajay @ Shahid, Munni and Ahad (PO) conspired to commit dacoity at the house of Smt. Khatoon Begum, r/o 5371, Koocha Rehman, gali Anarwali, Chandni Cho...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Kirat International Through Its Proprietor Sh Vs. Union of India ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:28. 01.2014 + W.P.(C) 372/2014, C.M. APPL. 743/2014 & 744/2014 M/S. KIRAT INTERNATIONAL THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI HARMEET SINGH LUTHRA ..Petitioner Through: Appearance not given. Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..Respondents Through: Sh. B.V. Niren, CGSC, for Resp. Nos. 1 and 2 (UOI). Sh. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate, for Resp. No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. Issue notice. Sh. B.V. Niren, CGSC accepts notice on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sh. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of Respondent No.3.2. The petitioner imported fitness equipment from three different places, i.e. China, Korea and the United States of America (US). Upon being issued with Show Cause Notices alleging under-invoicing under various provisions of law, the petitioner approached the Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission (hereafter referred...
Tag this Judgment!Pratap NaraIn Mathur Vs. Mcd and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on: January 28, 2014 + C.R.P. No.12/2011 PRATAP NARAIN MATHUR ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Ravindra Dayal, Adv. versus MCD & ORS Through ..... Respondents Mr.Kuldeep Singh Rathor, Adv. for Mr.Ajay Arora, Adv. for R-1/MCD. Mr.Rohit Gandhi, Adv. with Ms.Manpreet Kaur, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. By way of the present petition under Section 115 CPC, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 8th March 2010 passed by the learned Trial Court in a suit for declaration, permanent and mandatory injunctions and damages (hereinafter referred to as the said suit) filed by the petitioner in respect of a plot bearing No.221, Bank Enclave, near Laxmi Nagar, Delhi110092 (hereinafter referred to as the suit property) whereby the learned Sr. Civil Judge has allowed the application of the respondent No.3 under Section 10 CPC and stayed the suit.2. The brief facts are that prior to present proceed...
Tag this Judgment!