Delhi Court November 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 27 of about 1,333 results (0.022 seconds)Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi Vs. M/S. Manju Finance Corporati ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: November 26, 2014 + ITA No.339/2002 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Akash Vajpai , Advocate Versus M/S. MANJU FINANCE CORPORATION, NEW DELHI ..... Respondent Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(Oral) 1. This appeal by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, in short) impugns the order dated 15.04.2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal, in short) annulling and setting aside block assessment proceedings under Section 158BD of the Act. The block assessment period involved is 01.04.1986 to 29.08.1996.2. By order dated 01.02.2005, the following substantial question of law was framed:Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, non-issuance of notice under Section 158BD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 would vitiate the proceedings initiated under Section 158BC of the Act?.3. The respond...
Tag this Judgment!Deepak @ D.K. Vs. the State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:19. h November, 2014 Delivered on:26. h November, 2014 CRL.A. No.664 of 2008 DEEPAK @ D.K. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate with Appellant in person. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Isha Khanna, APP WITH CRL.A. No.665 of 2008 KAPIL @ DAYAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate with Appellant in person. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP. AND CRL.A. No.806 of 2008 SURENDER @ JEETU Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Mukul Sharma with Mr. Ramesh K. Sharma, Advocate with Appellant in person. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2611.2014 1. These three appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 23rd July 2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (SJ) in SC No.83 of 2006 holding the Appellants guilty of the offenc...
Tag this Judgment!Kapil @ Dayal Vs. the State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:19. h November, 2014 Delivered on:26. h November, 2014 CRL.A. No.664 of 2008 DEEPAK @ D.K. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate with Appellant in person. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Isha Khanna, APP WITH CRL.A. No.665 of 2008 KAPIL @ DAYAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate with Appellant in person. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP. AND CRL.A. No.806 of 2008 SURENDER @ JEETU Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Mukul Sharma with Mr. Ramesh K. Sharma, Advocate with Appellant in person. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2611.2014 1. These three appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 23rd July 2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (SJ) in SC No.83 of 2006 holding the Appellants guilty of the offenc...
Tag this Judgment!Surender @ Jeetu Vs. the State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:19. h November, 2014 Delivered on:26. h November, 2014 CRL.A. No.664 of 2008 DEEPAK @ D.K. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate with Appellant in person. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Isha Khanna, APP WITH CRL.A. No.665 of 2008 KAPIL @ DAYAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate with Appellant in person. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP. AND CRL.A. No.806 of 2008 SURENDER @ JEETU Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Mukul Sharma with Mr. Ramesh K. Sharma, Advocate with Appellant in person. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT2611.2014 1. These three appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 23rd July 2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (SJ) in SC No.83 of 2006 holding the Appellants guilty of the offenc...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Narender Yadav Vs. Chaudhary Kishan Chand and Sons and ors
Court: Delhi
$~ 2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1965/2006 & I.A. 2842/2009, I.A. 4965/2014 & I.A. 22149/2014 Date of decision :26th November, 2014 % SHRI NARENDER YADAV ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr.Amarjeet Yadav, Advocate Legal heirs of plaintiff, in person. versus CHAUDHARY KISHAN CHAND & SONS AND ORS...... Defendant Through: Mr.Pradeep K. Bakshi, Adv. for Ds=1 & 2 Mr.Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate for defendants 4 & 5 Defendant no.3, in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) IA.No.23458/2014 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for partition, rendition of accounts, declaration and injunction against the defendants.2. Parties have filed the present application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC for recording the terms of settlement. All the parties including legal heirs of the deceased plaintiffs are present in court today. They are identified by their respective counsel. Defendant no.3 (Surinder Yadav) is present in person in court today.3. Counsel for the...
Tag this Judgment!Jasmeet Kaur Talwar and anr. Vs. Gurjit Singh Talwar
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:26. h November, 2014 + I.P.A. No.67/ 2013 JASMEET KAUR TALWAR AND ANR. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Prabhjit Jauhar, Advocate and Ms. Anupama, Advocate. versus GURJIT SINGH TALWAR Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Y.P. Narula, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vishal Singh, Advocate and Ms. Jyoti Kataria, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL I.A. No.11050/ 2014 (u/s. 20 (3) of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 r/w Section 151 CPC) in I.P.A. No.67/ 2013 1. This suit (in the form of a Petition as an indigent person) has been filed by the two Petitioners; Petitioner No.1 is the wife and Petitioner No.2 is the daughter of the Respondent.2. In the main petition, maintenance on account of Respondents cruelty and neglect to maintain the Petitioners has been claimed. It is averred that Petitioner No.1 was married to the Respondent on 31.10.1982. A daughter i.e. Petitioner No.2 and a son were born to Petitioner No.1 from the loins...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Jasprit Singh Vs. Sh. Tinku Wadhwa and ors.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CM(M) 1052/2014 & C.M.Nos.19496/2014 (Stay), 19497/2014 (Exemption) 26th November, 2014 % SH. JASPRIT SINGH Through: ......Petitioner Mr.V.M.Issar, Advocate. VERSUS SH. TINKU WADHWA & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, Advocate for R- 2 & 3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is indeed a very frivolous petition to say the least. This I am stating because admittedly the petitioner, who was the plaintiff in the trial court, got recorded his statement before the trial court on 20.10.2014 stating that he has settled all his disputes with the respondent no.1/defendant, and therefore he does not want to pursue the suit. Accordingly, the trial court vide order dated 21.10.2014 allowed the suit to be withdrawn.2. The order passed by the trial court and the statement of petitioner which was recorded b...
Tag this Judgment!Tarun Chandiok and anr. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: November 26, 2014 + CM(M) 1049/2014 & C.M. No.19451/2013 TARUN CHANDIOK & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Rakesh Tikku, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mahir Malhtora & Ms. Medha Sachdev, Advocates with petitioner in person Mr. Dhruv Sharma, Advocate for petitioner No.2 versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Impugned order of 3rd November, 2014 refuses to pre-pone the date of hearing. To obtain divorce by mutual consent, second motion petition under Section 13 B (2) of The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been filed on 28th August, 2014 by petitioners and it was listed before the concerned family court on 2nd September, 2014. The learned trial court has adjourned the said petition to 19th February, 2015 for recording of statement of the parties. Impugned order notes that petitioner may migrate after giving power of attorney and heavy pendency is the reason put-forth for re...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Mukund Krishna Barman Vs. Sh. Surender Kumar Malhotra (Deceased) T ...
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RC.REV.No.266/2013 & C.M.No.11369/2013 (Stay) 26th November, 2014 % SH. MUKUND KRISHNA BARMAN ......Petitioner Through: Mr.Vibhor Goela, Advocate. VERSUS SH. SURENDER KUMAR MALHOTRA (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS ...... Respondents Through: Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This rent control revision petition filed under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) impugns the judgment of the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) dated 26.4.2013 by which the ARC has dismissed the leave to defend application and has decreed the bonafide necessity eviction petition filed under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act with respect to a portion of the ground floor of house no.E-5/33, Krishna Nagar, Delhi-51 as shown in red colour in the site plan filed with the eviction petition.2. I may note that the evictio...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Sonu Kumar Yadav
Court: Delhi
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision :26. h November, 2014 % + CRL.L.P. 76/2014 STATE Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for the State with Ms.Shinjan Jain, Adv. and SI Alok Kumar Rajan, PS Sarai Rohilla. versus SONU KUMAR YADAV Through : ..... Respondent None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRATIBHA RANI, J.(ORAL) 1. The State is seeking leave to appeal impugning the judgment dated 26.10.2013 passed by learned Addl. Session Judge in Session Case No.151/2013 whereby the Respondent Sonu Kumar Yadav was acquitted of the charges under Section 354-A/363 IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act.2. The grievance of the State is that from the statement of the child victim (PW-4) as well as the Complainant (PW-1), the Prosecution has been able to prove its case against the Respondent/Accused beyond reasonable doubt. However, learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate their testimony in correct perspective and acquitted the Respondent on non-existent ...
Tag this Judgment!