Delhi Court February 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 2 of about 540 results (0.013 seconds)Ald Automotive Pvt Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Trade and Taxes Delhi
Court: Delhi
$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:28. 02.2014 + ST.APPL. 4/2014 ALD AUTOMOTIVE PVT LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mrs. Premlata Bansal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Megha Mehta and Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER TRADE AND TAXES DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani with Ms. Bandana Shukla, Ms. Megha Bharara and Ms. Madhu Bhatia, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) 1. Issue notice. Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent.2. The present appeal seeks to urge the following substantial question of law:whether the input credit claimed by the appellant/assessee was correctly disallowed and whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the disallowance was valid in rejecting the application for pre-deposit. 3. The brief facts are that the appellant is a VAT dealer engaged in leasing of motor vehicles. The VAT Audit Dep...
Tag this Judgment!The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pappu Kumar @ Pushap Kumar ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.125/2013 % 28th February, 2014 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ......Appellant Through: Mr. R.C.Mahajan, Adv. VERSUS PAPPU KUMAR @ PUSHAP KUMAR & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Ms. Pratima N. Chauhan, Adv. for R1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This first appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 impugning the order of the Commissioner dated 24.12.2012 by which the Commissioner has imposed interest and penalty upon the appellant-insurance company as per Section 4(A) of the Act.2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant- insurance company could not have been fastened with the liability of the penalty.3. I have recently had an occasion to examine this aspect in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Saroj Singh & ors. in FAO512014 decided on 14.2.2014 in which I have held that unless the insur...
Tag this Judgment!Harminder Singh Vs. Saroj Devi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.266/2013 & CM97092013(stay) % HARMINDER SINGH Through:28. h February, 2014 ......Appellant Mr. S.P.Chauhan, Adv. VERSUS SAROJ DEVI ...... Respondent Through: Mr. J.K.Jain, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This first appeal is filed under Order 43 Rule 1(d) CPC impugning the order of the court below dated 2.4.2013 which has dismissed the application filed by the appellant-defendant for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 15.3.2007.2. The facts of the case are that respondent-plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance with respect to the property admeasuring 50 sq. yds situated in K.No.330, Village Siraspur, Swaroop Nagar, Delhi. Total consideration under the agreement to sell was Rs. 3,50,000/- and by means of different paragraphs in the plaint, it is said that a total sum of Rs. 3 lacs ...
Tag this Judgment!Daya Narayan Pandey Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.34/2013 28th February, 2014 % DAYA NARAYAN PANDEY Through: ..... Appellant Mr. J.K.Tripathi, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. J.K.Singh, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This regular second appeal is filed against the judgment of the first appellate court dated 24.11.2012 which has accepted the appeal of the respondents herein and set aside the judgment of the trial court dated 20.5.2011. Trial court had decreed the suit filed by the appellant-plaintiff challenging the termination of his service. The first appellate court has set aside the judgment of the trial court only on the ground that the appellantplaintiff ought to have challenged the orders passed in appeal by the appellate authority and the revision authority which dismissed the challenges to the orders of the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority, an...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Satto Devi and ors
Court: Delhi
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h February, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 87/2011 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms. Savita Singh, Adv. versus SATTO DEVI & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Anshuman Bal, Adv. for R1 to R7. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 20.11.2010, whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation as under:1.2. 3.4. 5.2. Loss of income Loss of love and affection Loss of Estate Loss of consortium Last rite expenses TOTAL : : : : : : Rs.7,20,000/Rs.40,000/Rs.5,000/Rs.5,000/Rs.20,000/Rs.7,90,000/- Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the Claim Petition was filed under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, however, Ld. Tribunal has erred in granting compensation under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act.3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents / claimants do not dispute th...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Ajeet Singh @ Jeet Singh and ors
Court: Delhi
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:28. h February, 2014 MAC.APP. 748/2011 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Manoj R. Sinha, Adv. Versus AJEET SINGH @ JEET SINGH & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. for R1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 20.04.2011 whereby Ld. Tribunal awarded compensation as under:NON PECUNIARY DAMAGES:1. Towards special diet :2. Towards conveyance allowance :3. Towards mental pain, agony, loss of amenities of life, happiness, frustration towards disfigurement and enjoyment of life : MAC. Appeal No.748/2011 Rs.10,000/Rs.10,000/- PECUNIARY DAMAGES:1. Towards functional disability :2. Towards medical expenses :3. Towards not being able to do his Duties for 6 months : TOTAL :2. Rs.2,15,804/Rs.8673/Rs.23,508/Rs.4,67,985/- Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits th...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Cimmco Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:28. 02.2014 + W.P.(C) 626/2014, C.M. APPL. 1246/2014 UNION OF INDIA ..Petitioner Through: Sh. Rajeeve Mehra, ASG with Ms. Geetanjali Mohan and Sh. Ashish Virmani, Advocates. Versus CIMMCO LTD. AND ORS. ..Respondents Through: Sh. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Sh. K. Datta, Sh. Ashish Verma and Sh. Rahul Malhotra, Advocates, for Resp. No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. This writ petition impugns an order of the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (AAIFR) dated 7.5.2013 dismissing the appeal of the Union of India, through the Railway Ministry, (hereafter Railways) against an order of the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) dated 12.3.2012, concerning certain concessions to be provided by the Railways to Cimmco Birla Ltd. (CBL), the respondent, in terms of a Sanctioned Scheme for rehabilitation sanctioned b...
Tag this Judgment!Delhi Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Devender Kumar Sehgal
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on February 28, 2014 + W.P.(C) 1327/2014 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION & ANR. ..... Petitioner Represented by: Ms.Avnish Ahlawat, Advocate versus DEVENDER KUMAR SEHGAL ..... Respondent Represented by: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.(Oral) W.P.(C) 1327/2014 1. The challenge by the Delhi Transport Corporation is to the award dated September 28, 2013 in I.D. No.02402C0645582007 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court whereby the Labour Court has held that the punishment of removal from services awarded to the respondent by the petitioner is harsh and shocking and directed that, he may be simply discharged from services from the date of termination i.e. October 12, 2006 with retirement benefits.2. The brief facts are that a charge sheet was issued to the respondent alleging therein that he remained absent from duties without intimation from December 12, 2004 and after four reminders to appear before the...
Tag this Judgment!Mahavir Singh Vs. the Chairman Manager, Mazhrul Islam Secondary Scho
Court: Delhi
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:28. 02.2014 + W.P.(C) 6255/2013 and CM No.13676/2013 (stay) MAHAVIR SINGH ..... PETITIONER VERSUS THE CHAIRMAN/ MANAGER, MAZHRUL ISLAM SECONDARY SCHOOL AND ORS .... RESPONDENTS ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE: For the Petitioner: Mr. S. Kumar, proxy counsel for Mr. R.K. Saini, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Shahid Azad, Ms. Shabana Ahmed, Mr. Ashutosh Rana and Mr. Shabbir Ali, Advocates for R-1 Ms. Latika Chaudhary, proxy counsel for Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Advocate for R-2 & 3 CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J1 This is a writ petition whereby the petitioner seeks to assail the resolution dated 30.06.2012, passed by respondent no.1 school. The challenge is laid, in the background of the following short facts :1.1 The petitioner is a teacher, who was appointed as a Physical Education Teacher (in short P.E.T.), for the first time on 08.01.1983 with Hari Mandir DAV School, Darya Ganj, Delhi. The pe...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 18(1) Vs. M/S Urban Mass Transit Ltd ...
Court: Delhi
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:28. 02.2014 + ITA842014 CM APPL.3914/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE181) ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rohit Madan, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Akash Vajpai, Advocate. versus M/S URBAN MASS TRANSIT LTD. Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) CM APPL.3914/2014 (condonation of delay) In the facts and circumstances of the case, delay is condoned. Application stands allowed. ITA842014 1. The Revenue claims to be aggrieved by an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) made in two appeals preferred by the assessee - M/s Urban Mass Transit Ltd., for the assessment year 2007-08.2. The assessee, a public limited company, was a joint venture enterprise of the Central Government, the State of Andhra Pradesh ITA842014 Page 1 and the State Transport Service Operator and Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Service...
Tag this Judgment!