Delhi Court October 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 14 of about 220 results (0.019 seconds)Sudhanshu Bharadwaj Vs. Air India Limited
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:25. 09.2014 Judgment delivered on:28. 10.2014 % + ARB. P. 431/2012 SHISHIR GUPTA ..... Petitioner Versus AIR INDIA LIMITED + ..... Respondent ARB. P. 434/2012 SUDHANSHU BHARADWAJ ..... Petitioner Versus AIR INDIA LIMITED ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr. Kaustabh Sinha and Mr. Virender Negi, Advocates in Arb. P. 431/2012 Mr. Jitin Sahai and Mr. Naveen Gaur, Advocates in Arb. 434/2012 For the Respondents: Mr. Mudit Sharma and Mr. Tanmaya Nirmal, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER,J1 These are the petitions filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act) against a common respondent i.e., Air India Ltd.2. The respondent is resisting the appointment of arbitrator in the matter broadly on two grounds : First, that there is no dispute obtaining between the parties which, requires adjudication. Second, the arbitr...
Tag this Judgment!Krishan Kumar Vs. Man Mohd and ors
Court: Delhi
$~A-43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision: October 28, 2014 MAC.APP. 725/2012 KRISHAN KUMAR Through versus MAN MOHD AND ORS Through ..... Appellant Mr.Manish Maini, Adv. ..... Respondent Mr.R.C.Mahajan, Adv. for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is filed seeking enhancement of compensation granted as per the Award dated 16.3.2012. The brief facts are that on 13.2.2007 the appellant alongwith Kumari Mausam was going to Ghaziabad on Motorcycle. When they reached Govindpuri Police Chowki a truck came from behind and hit the motorcycle. The appellant fell down and was grievously injured in the accident.2. Based on the evidence on record the Tribunal granted the following compensation:Cost on treatment Pain and sufferings Conveyance and Special diet Loss of income Future loss of income Loss of amenities Artificial Limb Total MAC.APP.725/2012 : : : : : : :3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has made f...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co Ltd Vs. Mohd Akhtar and ors
Court: Delhi
$~A-1 & 45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:28. 10.2014 MAC.APP. 441/2014 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Through Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. versus MOHD AKHTAR & ORS ..... Respondents Through + Mr. S.N. Parashar, Adv. MAC.APP. 961/2014 MOHD AKHTAR & ANR. ..... Appellants Through Mr. S.N. Parashar, Adv. versus NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Respondent Through Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) 1. MAC.APP.441/2014 is filed by the insurance company seeking to impugn the Award dated 10.03.2014. MAC.APP.961/2014 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. The brief facts which led to filing of the claim petition are that on 01.05.2013, the deceased Sh. Asmat @Mohd. Ashmat was sitting on a motorcycle which was stationary on the extreme side of the road at Loni Road, Uttar Pradesh. Suddenly a dumper driven by Respondent No.3 in a rash and negligent manner came fr...
Tag this Judgment!Taruna Malik Vs. the State , Govt Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :24. h SEPTEMBER, 2014 DECIDED ON :28. h OCTOBER, 2014 + TEST.CASE.No.61/2013 TARUNA MALIK ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Hirein Sharma, Advocate. versus THE STATE , GOVT NCT OF DELHI Through : None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Petitioner Taruna Malik has filed the present petition under Section 272 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for grant of probate of Will dated 18.11.2010 executed by Late Smt.Santosh Bakshi w/o Late Sh.Vishwa Nath regarding her estate i.e. One half share in the property bearing No.A-674, Block-A, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi. It is averred that Late Smt.Santosh Bakshi executed the said Will in favour of the petitioner and Mrs.Harsh Gogia.2. It is averred that Late Smt.Santosh Bakshi was a resident of 6/22, Shanti Niketan, New Delhi. She expired on 22.12.2012. At the time of her death, she had left her last Will and Testament dated 18.11.2010 duly registered as document ...
Tag this Judgment!Deepak Kumar and ors Vs. State (Govt of Nct Delhi) and anr
Court: Delhi
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4814/2014 DEEPAK KUMAR & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Y.N. Singh Sengar & Mr.Abhishek Bhargava, Advocates with petitioners in person versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Nishi Jain, APP with Insp. Rajesh Kumar, PS Rajouri Garden R-2/complainant in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition has been moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.369/2011 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at Police Station Rajouri Garden on 01.10.2011 on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties.2. Issue notice.3. Counsel for the State enters appearance and accepts notice. The complainant, Ritu, is present in person. The Investigating Officer, Inspector Rajesh Kumar, Police Station Rajouri Garden, who is also present in Court, identifies the petitioners as well as the complainant...
Tag this Judgment!Vinod Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: October 27, 2014 + CRL.A. 580/2014 VINOD Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.M.L.Yadav, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP SI Manisha Sharma, P.S.Aman Vihar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Vide decision dated March 30, 2013 Vinod has been held guilty for having committed an offence punishable under Section 376(2)(f) IPC and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine in sum of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for six months as per the order on sentence dated April 04, 2013. He challenges his conviction urging that the testimony of the child victim who appeared as PW-9 does not inspire any confidence and further that he has been falsely implicated by the victims parents who have planted Jyoti PW10 as a witness.2. This is not a case of the usual t...
Tag this Judgment!Uoi and ors. Vs. Doordarshan Programme Professional Union and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON:18. 09.2014 PRONOUNCED ON:27. 10.2014 + W.P. (C) 18034/2004 & 18035/2004 UOI & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. versus DOORDARSHAN PROGRAMME PROFESSIONAL UNION AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj with Mr. Parmod Bhardwaj, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.1. The Prasar Bharti Corporation (hereafter called Prasar Bharti) is aggrieved by two orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (CAT) in OA No.322/2001 dated 5.12.2012 and RA No.339/2003 dated 13.7.2004 by which the application of the respondents (hereafter called as the applicants) questioning its decision to recall the financial upgradation given to them, was upheld.2. The brief facts are that the applicant Association espouses the cause of Central Government employees who were deployed on deputation to the Prasar Bharti; the se...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and Others Vs. Shri Anil Kumar Verma
Court: Delhi
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :27. 10.2014 + W.P.(C) 6137/2013, C.M. NO.13514/2013 UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..... Petitioners Through: Sh. Vivek Kumar Standing Counsel, GNCTD. Tandon, versus SHRI ANIL KUMAR VERMA ..... Respondent Through: Respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The Union of India (UOI) claims to be aggrieved by two orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 21.08.2012, in O.A. No.3715/2011 (hereafter referred to as the main order) and the order in review proceeding R.A. No.59/2013 dated 29.04.2013 (hereafter referred to as the review order). The issue concerns the pay fixation of the respondent (hereafter referred to as the applicant), who was initially recruited as Head Constable/AWO in the Communications Wing of the Delhi Police.2. The brief facts are that the applicant was appointed as Constable (Exe) in the pay scale ...
Tag this Judgment!Housing and Urban Development Corporation Limited Vs. Additional Commi ...
Court: Delhi
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL No.339/2014 Date of decision:27. h October, 2014 HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED ..... Appellant Through Mr. Gagan Kumar & Ms. Niyati Chanana, Advocates. versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we frame the following substantial question of law:Whether Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that in terms of minutes of meeting held on 7 th September, 1995 administrative expenses of 1.5% had accrued in respect of residential quarters at Andrews Ganj and were taxable as income?.2. With the consent of the parties and as a short issue arises for consideration, we have taken up the appeal for hearing and the same is disposed of by this judgment.3. The appellant-assessee is a compa...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Inplan Vs. Banaras Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order delivered on:27. h October, 2014 % + I.A. Nos.6741/2013, 6743/2013 & 6768/2013 in CS(OS) No.95/2005 M/S INPLAN ..... Plaintiff Through Mr.Vivekanand, Adv. versus BANARAS MANUFACTURERS PVT. LTD. ..... Defendant Through Mr.Keshav Dayal, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Varun Kumar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs.34,71,803/- against the defendant. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant had invited tenders at Delhi for the construction of a factory at Plot No.36, Sector-31, Greater Noida. In response to the invitation of the tender, the plaintiff submitted tender from its registered office at Delhi to the office of the defendant at Delhi vide letter dated 22nd December, 2000. The tender of the plaintiff was accepted who was awarded the work by the defendant vide Work Order dated 12th May, 2001. After awarding of the work, the plaintiff had made all the arrangement...
Tag this Judgment!