Delhi Court December 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 109 of about 1,089 results (0.018 seconds)Pradeep @ Kuldeep Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 17, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 01, 2014 % + CRL.A. 261/2014 PRADEEP @ KULDEEP Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Sumeet Verma, Advocate with Mr.Amit Kala, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.Anil Sharma CRL.A. 116/2014 ROHIT Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Neeraj Bhardwaj, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.Anil Sharma CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARDEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PARDEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. On March 27, 2008 a joint written complaint Ex.PW-5/A was handed over by Ram Prasad PW-2, father of Rajan (hereinafter referred to as the deceased), Babloo @ Mirajuddin PW-5, the owner-cum-driver of an Innova motor vehicle bearing registration No.DL7X1951 and Hari Om Gupta PW-6, the proprietor of Himanshu Tours and Travels, informing the SHO of PS Mayur Vihar that Kuldeep and Pradeep, having mobi...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Goldkist Mobile Academy Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jammu and Kashmir Bank and o ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (CIVIL) No.7749/2014 Reserved on: Date of Decision: % 14th November, 2014 1st December, 2014 M/s Goldkist Mobile Academy Pvt. Ltd. ....Petitioner Through Mr. Ramji Srinivasan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anil K. Khaware, Ms.Azma and Ms. Sara Sundaram, Advocates. Versus Jammu & Kashmir Bank & Ors. Respondents Through Mr. Arjun Singh Bhati, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, Adv. for R-2. Mr. Ashish Sharma, Adv. for R-3. Mr. Pankaj Vivek, Adv. for R-4. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.M/s Goldkist Mobile Academy Pvt. Ltd., the petitioner-auction bidder by way of this writ petition under Article 226- 227 of the Constitution of India, has impugned the order dated 10th October, 2014, passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT, for short).2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd respondent No.3 (borrower, for short) had availed a loan facility from Jammu...
Tag this Judgment!Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. Vs. the Government of Nct of Delhi and ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:1. t December, 2014 + CRL. M.C. 4512/2014 & CRL.M.A. 15439/2014 RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. R Jawaharlal with Mr. Siddharth Bawa, Advocates. versus THE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vinod Diwakar, APP for the State. Insecticide Inspector Somvir Arya CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH VED PRAKASH VAISH, J.(ORAL) 1. By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) the petitioner has assailed the order dated 20.09.2014 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate-03, North-West, District Court, Rohini Courts, Delhi in Criminal Complaint No.274/01/13 whereby the application for retesting of the sample by Central Insecticides Laboratory (hereinafter referred to as CIL) was dismissed.2. Brief facts as stated in the complaint of respondent No.2 are that on 30.01.2013 the notified Insecticide I...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Vs. Ng Technologies Ltd.
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:1. t December, 2014 + ITA No.82/2012 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME ..... Appellant Through Mr. Rohit Madan, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Ruchir Bhatia and Mr. Akash Vajpai, Advocates. versus NG TECHNOLOGIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Ashish Makhija, Mr. Karamveer Jindal, Advocates for the Official Liquidator. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) pertains to assessment years 2006-07 and was admitted for hearing vide order dated 7th December, 2012, on the following substantial question of law:Whether the ld. ITAT was correct in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee in holding that the assessee had discharged the onus cast upon it under Explanation-I Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act?. We note that the assessee company has gone into liquidation and the Official Liquidator...
Tag this Judgment!Ravinder Kumar Ahuja Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
$~31 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:01. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 7102/2014 & CM No.16653/2014 (Stay) RAVINDER KUMAR AHUJA ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr S.K. Rout, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr Siddharth Panda, Advocate for R-1 & R-2 Mr Pawan Mathur, Advocate for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The counter affidavit on behalf of respondent No.1 has been handed over to us by Mr Siddharth Panda, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. The same is taken on record.2. By way of this writ petition the petitioner is seeking 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. Consequently...
Tag this Judgment!Real Image Media Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dlf Utilities Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :26. 11.2014 Judgment delivered on:01. 12.2014 + ARB. P. 109/2013 REAL IMAGE MEDIA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. . ..... PETITIONER Versus DLF UTILITIES LTD. ..... RESPONDENT Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr. Amol Chitale, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ankur Khandelwal, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER,J1 This is a petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act). The reliefs prayed for, broadly, are : (i). appoint an independent arbitrator (ii). declare null and void the appointment of the person appointed by the respondent as an arbitrator; (iii). stay further proceedings before the arbitrator appointed by the respondent, till final adjudication of the instant matter; and (iv). lastly, cost of proceedings be awarded in favour of the petitioner.2. For the purposes of adjudicati...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Gaganjot Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~2. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Decided on :01. 12.2014 W.P.(CRL) 1169/2014 SH. GAGANJOT SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Vivek Sood, Mr. Sanjay Rathi & Mr. Devender Partap Singh, Advocates. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, Additional Standing Counsel (Crl.) along with ACP R.S. Manku, Inspector Gagan Bhaskar and SI Randhir Singh, PSIGI Airport. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The proceedings have been referred to the Division Bench by an order of the learned Single Judge. The order of reference dated 22.07.2014 sets out point of reference, which is as below:Whether a cartridge, which is capable of being fired, is a complete ammunition within the meaning of Section 2(b) of Arms Act or a minor part of ammunition as referred to in Section 45(d) of the Arms Act?.2. The brief facts are that this petition was instituted for quashing of the First Infor...
Tag this Judgment!Vaskar Saha Vs. Manish Gupta
Court: Delhi
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Cont. Cas (C) No.853/2014 Decided on :1. t December, 2014 VASKAR SAHA Through: Petitioner Mr. Prateek Tushar Mohanty, Advocate. Versus MANISH GUPTA Through: Respondent Ms. Mini Pushkarna, SC with Ms. Namrata Mukim & Ms. Yoothica Pallavi, Advocates for the SDMC. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a contempt petition filed by the petitioner against the respondent/SDMC on account of the alleged wilful disobedience of the order dated 1.7.2014.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have also gone through the order in question.3. By virtue of the said order, respondent/SDMC was directed to take action against the illegal construction of Property No.B-1/173, Second Floor, Janak Puri, New Delhi-110058. The grievance of the petitioner was that the owner of the aforesaid property in question has raised unauthorized construction. The respondent had booked the aforesaid property on 3.6.2014 and passed a de...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh Agarwal Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
* s + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 3596/2014 Decided on :01. 12.2014 IN THE MATTER OF: RAJESH AGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Jawahar Raja, Advocate with Ms. Sahana Manjesh, Advocate with petitioner in person. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. V.S.R. Krishna, Advocate for R-1 and R-2/UOI. Ms. Maninder Acharya, Senior Advocate with Mr. Dipak Bhattacharya and Mr. M.S.Mukherjee, Advocates for R-3. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner, who is presently working on the post of Principal Chief Engineer, Konkan Railways Corporation Ltd., Navi Mumbai, seeks quashing of the decision/order of the respondent No.1/Ministry and the respondent No.2/DOPT of declining to appoint him to the post of Director (Way and Works), Konkan Railways Corporation Ltd., and further, seeks directions to the respondent No.1/Ministry to appoint him to the subject post.2. The undisputed facts of the case are that on 28.05.2013, the...
Tag this Judgment!