Delhi Court November 2014 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.
NooruddIn Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 18, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: November 24, 2014 % + CRL.A. 811/2012 NOORUDDIN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr.Adv. instructed by Mr.M.Shamikh, Adv. versus STATE Represented by: + ..... Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP with SI Rizwan Khan PS Seelampur. CRL.A. 820/2012 SHAHID Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Shafiullah, Adv. versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP with SI Rizwan Khan PS Seelampur. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Nooruddin and Shahid assail the judgment dated June 06, 2012 whereby they were convicted for offences punishable under Sections 302/34 IPC for the murder of Ikramuddin and the order on sentence dated June 07, 2012 directing them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of `5000/- each.2. The prosecution case rests on the testimony of two eye-witness...
Sheshbir Alias Ajay Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 19, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: November 24, 2014 % + CRL.A. 1537/2011 SHESHBIR alias AJAY Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms.Srilina Roy, Advocate for Ms.Nandita Rao, Advocate. versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Sheshbir @ Ajay has been convicted for the conspiracy to commit kidnapping and murder of Satish and destruction of evidence vide the impugned judgment dated July 16, 2011 and directed to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of `5,000/- for offence punishable under Section 302/120B IPC, Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of seven years and a fine of `3,000/- for offence punishable under Sections 364/120B IPC and Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years and a fine of `2,000/for offence punishable under Sections 201/120B IPC. Charge sheet was filed agains...
Jagmal Vs. Ramesh Chand Aggarwal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:24. h November, 2014 + CS (OS) 735/ 2011 JAGMAL ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Smita Maan, Adv. versus RAMESH CHAND AGGARWAL AND ORS. Through: ..... Defendants Mr. Aditya Chandra, Adv. for D-1 and D-10. Mr. Pankaj Vivek, Adv. with Mr. Anupriya Singh, Adv. for D-2. Mr. Rajesh Yadav, Adv. for D-7, 8, 9, 11 and 12. % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL IA No.9211/ 2011 (Order VII Rule 11 CPC) in CS (OS) 735/ 2011 1. By virtue of this application, Defendant No.2 lays challenge to the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the present civil suit. The contention raised by the Plaintiff is that for the purpose of deciding maintainability of the suit, only the pleadings in the suit are to be considered. In the plaint, the Plaintiff has himself claimed that the land, the subject matter of the suit is an agricultural land covered by the provisions of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 (the Act of 1954).2. This suit for permanent injunction ...
Shikha Vashishth Vs. Ranjana Taneja
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order pronounced on: November 24, 2014 + I.A. No.613/2014 in CS(OS) No.879/2012 SHIKHA VASHISHTH Through ..... Plaintiff Ms.Jasmit Kaur, Adv. with Mr.S.K.Kalia, Adv. versus RANJANA TANEJA Through ..... Defendant Ms.Nidhi Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. By this order, I shall dispose of the abovementioned pending application filed by the defendant under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC for amendment of the written statement.2. It is stated in the application that after filing the written statement in January, 2013, the defendant realized that a substantial error of facts has been unintentionally committed viz., that the suit property was purchased by the majority of funds of the defendant herself and some money was paid by her husband also. Besides, the other developments took place which are mentioned in para 1 of the application. The same read as under:(a) Despite the fact that Smt.Manju ...
Escorts Ltd Vs. Rakesh Kumar Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:24. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 85/2010 & CM Nos.156/2010 & 5560/2011 NARESH TREHAN ..... Petitioner versus RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ..... Respondent AND + W.P.(C) 251/2010 & CM No.526/2010 AAA PORTFOLIO PVT LTD AND ANR. ..... Petitioners versus RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ..... Respondent AND + W.P.(C) 206/2010 & CM No.392/2010 ESCORTS LTD ..... Petitioner versus RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ..... Respondent AND + W.P.(C) 214/2010 & CM No.445/2010 CPIO CUM ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Petitioner versus RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ..... Respondent AND + W.P.(C) 202/2010 & 389/2010 ESCORTS HEART INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTRE W.P.(C) Nos. 85/2010 & other connected matters versus RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ..... Respondent AND + W.P.(C) 207/2010 & CM No.394/2010 RAJAN NANDA ..... Petitioner versus RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Mr Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate with Ms Shyel Trehan and Ms Manjira Dasgupta in...
Surya Kirti Thapar Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. h November, 2014 Date of Decision:24. h November, 2014 % + BAIL APPLN. 334/2014 & Crl.M.A.16198/2014 SURYA KIRTI THAPAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr. K. Singhal and Mr. S.K. Thapar, Advocates. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through: + .....Respondent Mr. Feroz Khan Gazi, APP for the State with Inspector A.K. Singh, P.S. EOW. BAIL APPLN. 1039/2014 VIJAY KUMAR SHARMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. K.K. Manan with Mr. Shailendera Singh, Advocates. versus STATE THROUGH: GNCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Feroz Khan Gazi, APP for the State with Inspector A.K. Singh, P.S. EOW. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH1 These are two applications filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) seeking regular bail in case FIR No.737/2007 under Sections 420/406/120B IPC registered at P.S. Connaught Place, New Delhi. Since, both the applicati...
Sanjay Mehta and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2014
$~ 41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:24. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 4530/2014 & CM90262014 SANJAY MEHTA & ANR. .... Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Sumit Bansal For the Respondents : Mr Vivek Goyal, CGSC with Ms Hanupaii for R-1. Mr Sidharth Panda for Mr Yeeshu Jain. Mr Arjun Pant for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioners seek the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding, which is the subject matter of the present writ petition, ought to be deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.2. The Award under the Lan...
Amita Mehta Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2014
$~ 40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:24. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 4529/2014 & CM90252014 AMITA MEHTA .... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Sumit Bansal For the Respondents : Mr Vivek Goyal, CGSC with Ms Hanupaii for R-1. Mr Siddharth Panda for L&B. Mr Arjun Pant for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding, which is the subject matter of the present writ petition, ought to be deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.2. The Award under the Land Acquisition Act, ...
Balasubramanian Ramachandran Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 8
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:24. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 6159/2013 & CM135492013 BALASUBRAMANIAN RAMACHANDRAN ..... Petitioner versus INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD8..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Deepak Chopra with Mr Amit Srivastava For the Respondents : Mr Kamal Sawhney with Mr Sanjay Kumar CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition is directed against the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), which was issued to the petitioner on 28.03.2012 seeking to re-open the assessment which had been completed under Section 143(3) of the said Act on 30.11.2007 in respect of the assessment year 2005-06.2. It is evident that the notice under Section 148 was issued beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Consequently, the first proviso to ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jubilant Offshore Drilling Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-24-2014
$~1. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA6942014 Date of decision:24. h November, 2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel & Mr. Abhishek Singh Baghel, Advocate. versus JUBILANT OFFSHORE DRILLING PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) This appeal by the Revenue relates to Assessment Year 2008-09 and impugns the order dated 14th February, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) in the case of M/s. Jubilant Offshore Drilling Private Limited.2. We have examined the assessment order, but it is difficult to appreciate and accept the logic and reasoning of the Assessing Officer to hold that the business of the assessee had not been set up and, therefore, expenditure of Rs.1,69,72,374/- should be treated as pre-operative expenses. The said expenditure was accordingly disall...
- ‹ Prev
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- Next ›
- Last »