Delhi Court February 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 16 of about 540 results (0.022 seconds)State Vs. Sanjay Kumar Valmiki
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DEATH SENTENCE REF. No.3 of 2012 Reserved on: February 6, 2014 Decision on: February 21, 2014 STATE ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor, APP. Inspector Bijender Singh, PS: Maurya Enclave. versus SANJAY KUMAR VALMIKI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate. AND CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1146 of 2012 and CRL.MB. No.1772 of 2012 Crl. M.A No.561 of 2013 SANJAY KUMAR VALMIKI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor, APP. Inspector Bijender Singh, PS: Maurya Enclave. CORAM: HONBLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR HONBLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA JUDGMENT2102.2014 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J:1. By judgment dated 11th May 2012 in Session Case No.166 of 2011, the Additional Sessions Judge-II (North-West), Rohini Courts, Delhi convicted Sanjay Kumar Valmiki of the offences under Sections 302, 363, 376 (2)(f), 376 and 201 IPC for kidnapping the prosecutrix/deceased U, aged about eight years...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:21. 02.2014 Crl Appeal no.459/2010 + TEJ SINGH @ TEJA .Appellant Through: Mr. Mohit Bhardwaj, Adv. Versus STATE Through: .Respondent Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP Crl Appeal no.700/2010 RAJINDER STATE .Appellant Through: Ms. Alpana Pandey, Adv. with appellant in person Versus .Respondent Through: Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP Crl Appeal no.701/2010 VIJAY KUMAR .Appellant Through: Ms. Alpana Pandey, Adv. with appellant in person Versus STATE Through: .Respondent Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) In the night intervening 13/14.04.2004, the dead body of a person aged about 25-26 years was found on the Service Road behind Ambedkar College Park in the jurisdiction of Police Station Shahdara. The information in this regard was recorded at Police Station Shahdara vide DD no.40A which was given to Inspector N.P. Singh, SHO of the aforesaid police station for investigation. He reached th...
Tag this Judgment!at and T Communication Services India (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Inc ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:12. h February, 2014 Date of Decision:21. t February, 2014 % + W.P. (C) 811/2012 AT & T COMMUNICATION SERVICES INDIA (P) LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Jayant K. Mehta, Advocate. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I &ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with Shri Abhishek Singh Baghel, Adv. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR, J.1. In the present proceedings, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order dated 26.12.2011 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi, directing a special audit of its accounts under Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2008-2009.2. The petitioner is a wholly owned subsidiary of AT&T Communication Services International Inc, USA and was incorporated on 23.04.1996. It is engaged in three business segments, na...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Kumar Valmiki Vs. State
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DEATH SENTENCE REF. No.3 of 2012 Reserved on: February 6, 2014 Decision on: February 21, 2014 STATE ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor, APP. Inspector Bijender Singh, PS: Maurya Enclave. versus SANJAY KUMAR VALMIKI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate. AND CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1146 of 2012 and CRL.MB. No.1772 of 2012 Crl. M.A No.561 of 2013 SANJAY KUMAR VALMIKI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor, APP. Inspector Bijender Singh, PS: Maurya Enclave. CORAM: HONBLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR HONBLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA JUDGMENT2102.2014 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J:1. By judgment dated 11th May 2012 in Session Case No.166 of 2011, the Additional Sessions Judge-II (North-West), Rohini Courts, Delhi convicted Sanjay Kumar Valmiki of the offences under Sections 302, 363, 376 (2)(f), 376 and 201 IPC for kidnapping the prosecutrix/deceased U, aged about eight years...
Tag this Judgment!Revell Gmbh and Co. Kg Vs. M/S Fore Square Retail Private Ltd.
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:21. 02.2014 CO.PET.95/2011 REVELL GMBH & CO. KG ..... Petitioner versus M/s FORE SQUARE RETAIL PRIVATE LTD. ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Ms Rekha Palli and Ms Punam Singh. For the Respondent : Mr Manik Dogra. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner company under Sections 433(e) and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, inter alia, praying for winding up of the respondent company on the ground that the respondent company has failed and neglected to pay a sum of USD534696.20, due and payable by the respondent to the petitioner on account of supply of goods (Model Kits products, Paints Accessories, Airbrush, Metal and Slot Cars). The respondent disputes that any amount is due and payable to the petitioner. The respondent alleges that goods supplied by the petitioner were defective, hazardous and substandard and ...
Tag this Judgment!Dharambir Bhambri Vs. Sanjeev Jindal
Court: Delhi
.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment pronounced on : February 21, 2014 CM(M) 941/2012 & C.M. No.16405/2013 VIKRAMJEET BHAMBRI Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Shekhar Dasi, Adv. versus SANJEEV JINDAL Through ..... Respondent Mr.K.K.Sharma, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Ashutosh Dubey & Mr.Abhishek Chauhan, Advs. AND + CM(M) 942/2012 & C.M. No.16403/2013 DHARAMBIR BHAMBRI Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Shekhar Dasi, Adv. versus SANJEEV JINDAL Through ..... Respondent Mr.K.K.Sharma, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Ashutosh Dubey & Mr.Abhishek Chauhan, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. I propose to decide both these petitions filed by the petitioners respectively under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by this common order. The petitioners have assailed the order(s) dated 21st July 2012 passed by the learned Trial Court whereby the respective applications filed by the petitioners under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC were dismissed.2. Brief facts for the purpose of adjudi...
Tag this Judgment!Bbc World News Limited Vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax Circle 1(1 ...
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.9064/2011 Reserved on:13. h November, 2013 Date of Decision:21. t February, 2014 % BBC World News Limited ....Petitioner Through Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar and Mr. Sheel Vardhan, Advocates. Versus Assistant Director of Income Tax Circle 1(1) Respondent Through Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Rupender Singh and Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.BBC World News Limited (formerly known as BBC World Ltd.), a company resident of and incorporated in United Kingdom, a wholly owned subsidiary of BBC Commercial Holdings Limited which in turn is a wholly owned subsidiary of the British Broadcasting Corporation, has filed the present writ petition for setting aside reassessment proceedings initiated in respect of the assessment year 2003-04, by issue of notice dated 30th March, 2010 under Section ...
Tag this Judgment!Microsoft Corporation and anr Vs. Jayesh and anr
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. t February, 2014. % + CS(OS) 1067/2007 MICROSOFT CORPORATION & ANR .....Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Jaya Negi, Advocate. Versus JAYESH & ANR ..... Defendants Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The right of the plaintiffs to restrain the defendants from selling or distributing unauthorized importations of the plaintiffs XBOX gaming consoles, within the meaning of Section 30(4) of The Trade Marks Act, 1999, is the question for adjudication in the present case.2. The case of the plaintiffs as laid out in the plaint is: I. that the plaintiff No.1 Microsoft Corporation is a company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Washington, USA and is the developer/owner of the XBOX gaming console and XBOX games; II. that the plaintiff No.2 Microsoft Corporation India Private Limited is the wholly owned marketing subsidiary of the plaintiff No.1 having its office at Nehru Place, Delhi and provides marke...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Shanta L. Keshwani Vs. Smt. Pratima Keshwani and ors.
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:21. t February, 2014 % + CS(OS) No.804/2009 SMT. SHANTA L. KESHWANI ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Adv. Versus SMT. PRATIMA KESHWANI & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Ranvir Singh & Mr. Robin Raju, Advs. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 The plaintiff has instituted this suit against the three defendants for the reliefs of, (a) recovery of possession of the entire basement, second floor and terrace floor of property No.5/30, Sarva Priya Vihar, New Delhi; and, (b) recovery of damages/mesne profits, pendente lite and future @ Rs.25,000/per month, pleading:(i) the defendant no.1 is the widow, the defendant no.2 Ms. Tejswani Keshwani is the daughter and the defendant no.3 Master Dhruv Keshwani is the son of Shri Ravi Keshwani, the deceased son of the plaintiff; (ii) that the husband of the plaintiff Shri L.H. Keshwani was the owner of property No.A-4, Mayfair Garden, Hauz Khas ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Parimal Mandir Vs. Bharat Vasi Sugandhit Dhoop and ors
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:21. t February, 2014. % + CS (OS) 985/2012 M/S PARIMAL MANDIR Through: .....Plaintiff Mr. Arjun Mukherjee, Adv. with Ms. Anusuya Nigam, Adv Versus BHARAT VASI SUGANDHIT DHOOP & ORS Through: None CORAM:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 ....Defendants The plaintiff has instituted this suit (on 13th April 2012) for (i) Permanent Injunction restraining the defendants from using the trademark/trade dress/label/packaging BHARAT VASI or any other deceptively similar trademark/trade dress/label/packaging in relation to Agarbathis and Dhoop or any other product so as to result in infringement of trademark, passing off, unfair competition and dilution; (ii) Permanent Injunction restraining the defendants from using the trade dress/label/packaging BHARAT VASI or any other deceptively similar trade dress/label/packaging in relation to Agarbathis and Dhoop or any other product so as to result in infringement of copyright; (iii) Deliverin...
Tag this Judgment!