Delhi Court January 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 18 of about 723 results (0.009 seconds)Shivam (Uz) International Vs. Commissioner of Customs and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~13 & 14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Decided on:27. 01.2014 W.P.(C) 1886/2013, C.M. APPL. 3597/2013 MAALVIKA IMPEX (INDIA) ..... Petitioner Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND ANR. ..... Respondents + W.P.(C) 1887/2013, C.M. APPL. 3598/2013 SHIVAM (UZ) INTERNATIONAL ..... Petitioner Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Navneet Panwar, Advocate, for appellants (13 and 14). Sh. Kamal Nijhawan, Sr. Standing Counsel with Sh. Sumit Gaur and Ms. Dinesh Patel, Advocates (13 and 14). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The petitioners seek an order quashing and setting-aside of the order of the Joint Secretary, Department of Revenue, Govt. of India dated 13.08.2012. W.P.(C) 1886/13 & W.P.(C) 1887/13 Page 1 2. The facts of this case are that the petitioners are merchant exporters of readymade garments. During the course of assessment proceedings, they relied...
Tag this Judgment!Rajender Kumar and ors. Vs. State (Govt. of Nct, Delhi)
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:27. 01.2014 + CRL. A. No.106 of 2010 RAJENDER KUMAR & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Keshav Kaushik, 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) On 26.7.2004, on receipt of information with respect to an incident in Som Bazaar, C-10 Block, Vasant Kunj, S.I. Swadesh Prakash of Police Station Vasant Kunj reached the spot, where he came to know that the injured had been taken to hospital. Two (2) wooden sticks were, however, lying on the spot at that time. On reaching Safdarjung Hospital, the Investigating Officer found injured Surinder, Naresh and Sanjay admitted there. He recorded the statement of Sanjay, who told him that like other Mondays, that day also he had installed his shop of cosmetics in C-1 Block of Vasant Kunj, Behind Vasant Valley School. Rajinder S/o Chand Ram reached there along with his brothers...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co Ltd Vs. Santosh Kumari and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:27. h January, 2014 MAC.APP. 343/2010 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Adv. Versus SANTOSH KUMARI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Amit Kumar Pandey, Adv. for respondent nos. 8(i) to 8(iii). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 01.02.2010, whereby ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for a sum of Rs.8,87,710/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued the present appeal on the ground that the driver and owner of the offending vehicle failed to produce the driving licence. The police had also filed a Criminal case under Section 279/304A IPC read with Section 3/181 of Motor Vehicles Act. Despite that ld. Tribunal has neither exonerated the appe...
Tag this Judgment!Maalvika Impex (India) Vs. Commissioner of Customs and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~13 & 14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Decided on:27. 01.2014 W.P.(C) 1886/2013, C.M. APPL. 3597/2013 MAALVIKA IMPEX (INDIA) ..... Petitioner Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND ANR. ..... Respondents + W.P.(C) 1887/2013, C.M. APPL. 3598/2013 SHIVAM (UZ) INTERNATIONAL ..... Petitioner Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Navneet Panwar, Advocate, for appellants (13 and 14). Sh. Kamal Nijhawan, Sr. Standing Counsel with Sh. Sumit Gaur and Ms. Dinesh Patel, Advocates (13 and 14). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The petitioners seek an order quashing and setting-aside of the order of the Joint Secretary, Department of Revenue, Govt. of India dated 13.08.2012. W.P.(C) 1886/13 & W.P.(C) 1887/13 Page 1 2. The facts of this case are that the petitioners are merchant exporters of readymade garments. During the course of assessment proceedings, they relied...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Tops Security Ltd. Vs. Tops Detective and Secuirty Services Ltd. K ...
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:27. h January, 2014 % + LPA No.407/2013, CM No.1673/2014 (for amendment in appeal) & CM No.9186/2013 (for stay). M/S TOPS SECURITY LTD. .. Appellant Through: Mr. K.C. Dubey, Adv. Versus TOPS DETECTIVE AND SECUIRTY SERVICES LTD. KARAMCHARI UNION (REGD.) .. Respondent Through: Mr. Prabhakar, Adv. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 This intra court appeal impugns the judgment dated 3rd May, 2013 of the learned Single Judge of this Court of dismissal of W.P.(C) No.2771/2013 preferred by the appellant. The said writ petition was preferred by the appellant challenging the order dated 19th January, 2012 of the Authority appointed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 allowing the application of the respondent Union under Section 20 of the Act for release of difference of minimum wages and wages paid for the period 1st August, 2005 to 31st January, 2006 and further directing the appellant to pay compensat...
Tag this Judgment!H.P.State Co-operative Development Federation Vs. Chandra Pal Singh
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % FAO No.164/2013 27th January, 2014 H.P.STATE CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT FEDERATION ......Appellant Through: Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Shailendra Singh, Mr. Shakeel Vali, Mr. Manish Kaushik and Mr. Anshul Garg, Advocates. VERSUS CHANDRA PAL SINGH Through: ...... Respondent Mr. V.P.Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Om Prakash and Mr. Sidhant Kaushik, Advocates for R-1. Mr. M.I.Choudhary, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 impugning the order dated 7.2.2013 passed by the court below by which the application filed by the appellant herein to recall the compromise order passed earlier on 3.10.2012 has been dismissed.2. Disputes in the present case pertained to the case of the appellant-cooperative society, as represented by the respondent no.2 herein,...
Tag this Judgment!Mahender Sharma Vs. Mr. Babu Lal and ors
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.90/2013 27th January, 2014 % MAHENDER SHARMA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. S.M. Tripathy, Advocate. versus MR. BABU LAL AND ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. S.N. Gupta, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. No.5431/2013(restoration) 1. present. Appeal was dismissed in default on 14.3.2013 when no one was The application for restoration will be effectively under Order 9 Rule 4 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and therefore no notice is required to the respondents before restoration. Application is allowed and the appeal is restored to its original number. C.M. stands disposed of. + FAO No.90/2013 2. This appeal is filed under Order 43 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugning the order of the Court below dated 7.1.2013 by which the application filed by the appellant/plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 10 CPC for direct...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Bharat Buildtech(P) Ltd` Vs. Harmohanjit Singh
Court: Delhi
$~23. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 772/2013 % Judgment dated 27.01.2014 M/S BHARAT BUILDTECH(P) LTD ..... Plaintiff Through : Ms.Vibha Mahajan Seth, Adv. versus HARMOHANJIT SINGH Through ..... Defendant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery for recovery of Rs.50.00 lakhs along with interest @18%, per annum, from the date of filing the present suit till the date of realization.2. Summons in the suit and notice in the application for stay were issued vide order dated 29.4.2013. By an order dated 22.7.2013 defendant was proceeded ex parte. Plaintiff has filed ex parte evidence by way of affidavit of Director of the plaintiff company (PW-1), who has deposed on the lines of the plaint. PW-1 has deposed that vide Resolution of the Board dated 17.4.2013 he was authorised to file the present suit, sign and verify the pleadings. A certified copy of the Board Resolution dated 17.4.2013 has been mark...
Tag this Judgment!The Commissioner of Income Tax-iv Vs. Empire Builtech Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:27. 01.2014 + ITA4932013 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjiv Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Jr. Standing Counsel. versus EMPIRE BUILTECH PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. V.N. Jha, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) 1. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration :Did the Tribunal fall into error of law in upholding the deletion of Rs.31.94 lakhs which had been added under Section 68 by the Assessing Officer in respect of AY200607 in the circumstances of the case?.2. With the consent of counsel for the parties, the matter is heard for disposal.3. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed its income tax return for the year 2006-07. It is a matter of record that the assessee was incorporated on 20.10.2005 and commenced business thereafter. ITA4932013 ...
Tag this Judgment!VipIn Suri Vs. D.D.A.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6109/2012 Decided on 27.01.2014 IN THE MATTER OF : VIPIN SURI ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor, Advocate versus D.D.A. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Amitabh Marwah, Advocate CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking directions to the respondent/DDA to issue a revised/fresh demand-cum-allotment letter in respect of Flat No.925, Second Floor, Pocket-C, Block-B, Loknaiak Puram, New Delhi at the cost in terms of its policy dated 06.06.2006 that was prevalent at the time of holding the remedial draw i.e. on 27.09.2007. The petitioner also seeks quashing of the demand-cum-allotment letter having block dates 30.03.2012-31.03.2012 in respect of the subject flat.2. The relevant facts of the case are that in the year 1979, the petitioner had got himself registered with the respondent/DDA for the allotment of a LIG flat under the New Pattern Registration Schem...
Tag this Judgment!