Delhi Court December 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.
Director of Income Tax (Exemption) Vs. M/S. Nbie Welfare Society, New ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
$~R146 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: December 03, 2014 + ITA672003 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Balbir Singh, Senior Standing Counsel with Mrs. Rubal Maini and Mr.Abhishek Singh Baghel, Advocates. versus M/S. NBIE WELFARE SOCIETY, NEW DELHI..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J (ORAL) 1. This appeal by the revenue pertains to assessment year 1996-97 and was admitted for hearing by order dated 6th November, 2006 on the following substantial question of law:Whether the ITAT was correct in holding that by mentioned (sic. mentioning) Further utilization in Form No.10 read with Rule 17 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 the Assessee has fulfilled its obligation as required under Section 11 (2) of the Act.2. The respondent society claiming itself to be a charitable institution had filed return of income for the assessment year 1996-97 declaring ni...
Pyarelal Vs. Sheela Devi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA822013 Decided on 3rd December, 2014 PYARELAL Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ramesh Kumar, Adv. versus SHEELA DEVI & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.(ORAL) 1. Appellant-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration, possession and permanent injunction against the respondent nos. 1 to 3. After service of summons, respondent nos. 1 and 2 appeared before the trial court and filed their separate written statement; however, subsequently they stopped appearing and were proceeded against ex-parte on 29th March, 2012. They did not lead any evidence. Respondent No.3 did not appear in court despite service and was proceeded against ex-parte.2. Vide ex-parte judgment and decree dated 3rd December, 2012 trial court has dismissed the suit. Trial court has held that appellant had failed to prove his ownership rights in the suit property, that is, House No.50-C consisting of one room, one kitchen and...
Smt. Lalita Devi and Ors Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO2192014 Decided on 3rd December, 2014 SMT. LALITA DEVI & ORS ..... Appellants Through :Mr. S.N. Parashar and Ms. Monika Phartyal, Advs. Versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Paritosh Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.(ORAL) 1. Appellants are parents, widow and children of Late Shri Ram Auttar @ Rangdar Paswan. They filed an application under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi, seeking compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- in respect of death of Late Shri Ram Auttar due to the injuries sustained in an untoward incident on 20th January, 2011 relating to the EMU train at New Delhi railway station. After trial, Tribunal has dismissed the claim application by the order dated 4th February, 2014, which has been impugned in this appeal.2. Appellants alleged in the application that on 20th January, 2011 deceased was returning to h...
Anil Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : November 18, 2014 Judgment Pronounced on : December 03, 2014 + CRL.A.456/2014 ANIL KUMAR Represented by: .....Appellant Ms.Nandita Rao, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: .....Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.Satish Kumar Sharma and Insp.N.S.Chauhan CRL.A.199/2014 PREM PAL Represented by: .....Appellant Mr.Neeraj Bhardwaj, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: .....Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.Satish Kumar Sharma and Insp.N.S.Chauhan CRL.A.393/2014 ANJU @ SONIA @ BABY Represented by: .....Appellant Mr.Joginder Tuli, Advocate with Mr.Tarun Nanda, Mr.Ashu Kumar Sharma and Ms.Pooja Arora, Advocates versus STATE Represented by: .....Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP Insp.Satish Kumar Sharma and Insp.N.S.Chauhan CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Process of criminal law was set into motion when at around 7:45 PM on February 08, 2007, DD No.52B, ...
Jitender @ Bunty Vs. State (Govt. of N.C.T)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: December 03, 2014 + CRL.A. 812/2011 JITENDER @ BUNTY Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Biswajit Kumar Patra, Advocate versus STATE (GOVT. OF N.C.T) Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP SI Md.Horoon, P.S.Tilak Nagar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Process of criminal law was set into motion when DD No.54A, Ex.PW-5/A, was recorded at 3:30 hours (middle of the night) on February 18, 2008 by the duty officer of PS Tilak Nagar to the effect that Jitender @ Bunty had reached the police station and informed that suspecting the character of his wife Jyoti he had killed her and the dead body had been kept by him in house No.WZ-32/8A, Gali No.4, Sant Garh. That he was willing to face the consequence of his action.2. Insp.Surender Dev PW-13, who was present at PS Tilak Nagar, when DD No.54A was recorded, proceeded to Chaukhandi Village, ...
Gautam Khaitan Vs. Enforcement Directorate
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:26. h November, 2014 Date of Decision:03rd December, 2014 % + BAIL APPLN. 2354/2014 GAUTAM KHAITAN Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. P.V. Kapur with Mr. Siddarth Luthra and Ms. Geeta Luthra, Sr. Advocates with Mr. K.K. Manan, Mr. P.K. Dubey, Advocates. versus ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC and Mr. Akash Nagar, Advocate with Mr. Vikas Singh, Dy. Director/ I.O. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH1 By this application filed under Section 439 read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner is seeking No.DLZO/15/2014/AD(VM)/CBI/ACU-V/NEW bail in DELHI ECIR under Section 120B read with Section 420 of IPC and Sections 7/8/9/12/13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of PC Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as PC Act) read with Sections 3 and 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, PMLA) registered by the Enforcement Department, New Delhi on 03.07.2014.2. T...
Manish Kumar Tyagi Vs. Shobhna Tyagi @ Madhavi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: December 03, 2014 + CM(M) 551/2014 MANISH KUMAR TYAGI Through: ..... Petitioner Ms.Rita Kumar and Ms.Anita Verma, Advocates versus % SHOBHNA TYAGI @ MADHAVI ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Santosh Kumar and Mr.Shikhar Garg, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) Petitioner-husband is aggrieved by impugned order of 9th May, 2014 vide which the concerned Family Court has dismissed petitioners application to enable him to take his minor child- Manya to a hill station of her choice during summer vacations from 15th May, 2014 to 1st July, 2014 observing that instead of preferring this application, petitioner ought to have approached the Guardian Court in Ghaziabad where he has filed petition under the Guardian and Wards Act. At the outset, it was put to petitioners counsel that this petition has become infructuous and the prayer made in this application cannot be granted now and the response of petitioners cou...
Kamlesh Vs. Neelam Sharma and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: December 03, 2014 + RSA No.374/2014 KAMLESH Through: ..... Appellant Ms.Geeta Mehrotra, Mr.Mohit Verma & Mrs.D.R.Tomar, Advocates versus NEELAM SHARMA & ANR. Through: Nemo ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Caveat No.1071/2014 None has appeared for caveator despite advance notice of the second appeal. RSA No.374/2014 & C.M.No.19857/2014(for stay) The concurrent findings of the courts below are that respondentsplaintiffs are entitled to possession of suit property i.e first floor and the roof over the first floor. The facts of this case are already noticed in the opening paragraphs of the trial court judgment and need no reiteration. Suffice it would be to note that respondent No.1-plaintiff had sold a shop on the ground floor of the suit property to respondent No.2 and respondent-plaintiff RSA No.374/2014 Page 1 had retained ownership and possession of the entire first floor constructed a...
State Vs. RiyazuddIn and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: November 20, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 03, 2014 % + CRL.A. 577/2013 RIYAZUDDIN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mohit Mathur, Advocate with Mr.Amish Dabas, Mr.Devendra Dedha, Mr.Praman Mathur, Mr.Manoj Pant, Mr.Badar Mehmood, Mr.Pankaj Verma, Ms.Utkarsha Kohli and Ms.Vasudha Datta, Advocates versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Represented by: + ..... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP with Inspector Lokender Singh, PS Malviya Nagar Ms.Karuna Chhatwal, Advocate with Mr.Shailendra Babbar, Advocate for Board of Homeopathy. CRL.A. 1155/2014 STATE Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Varun Goswami, APP with Inspector Lokender Singh, PS Malviya Nagar. versus RIYAZUDDIN & ORS. Represented by: Crl.A.No.577 of 2013 & 1155 of 2014 ..... Respondents Mr.Mohit Mathur, Advocate with Mr.Amish Dabas, Mr.Devinder Dedha, Mr.Praman Mathur and Ms.Vasudha Data, Advocates for R-1 Page 1 of 11 Mr.Chander M.Maini, Advocate with Mr.Satyam Chaturved...
M/S Bharat Power Control System Vs. Union of India and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-2014
29 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:03. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 8462/2014 M/S BHARAT POWER CONTROL SYSTEM ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Tanuj Khurana and Mr Gaurav Malik, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr Vivek Goyal, CGSC with Dr. Kumar Jwala, Advocates for R-1 & R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) CM No.19590/2014 (Exemption) The exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 8462/2014 & CM No.19589/2014 (Stay) 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned communication dated 30.10.2014 issued by the Executive Engineer, Central Public Works Department, Parliament House Annexe Project Electrical Division. WP(C) 8462/2014 virtue of the impugned letter dated 30.10.2014, the petitioners bid pursuant to the respondents NIT for extension of Parliament House Annexe, Parliament...
- ‹ Prev
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- Next ›
- Last »