Delhi Court February 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.
Dharmender Singh Vs. Dildar Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.53/2014 18th February, 2014 % DHARMENDER SINGH Through: ......Appellant Ms. Pratima M. Chauhan, Adv. VERSUS DILDAR SINGH & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No.3317/2014 (delay) & CM No.3318/2014 (delay in refiling) 1. For the reasons stated in the applications, delay in filing and refiling is condoned. CMs stand disposed of. CM No.3316/2014 (Exemption) 2. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. FAO532014 3. By this first appeal which is stated to be filed under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act,1923 (in short the Act) challenge is laid to the impugned order dated 19.2.2013 which has dismissed an application for enhancement of compensation by taking the disability as 100%, although, there was an earlier judgment passed in the main proceedings for compensation filed under Section 22 of the...
Uoi Through General Manager Northern Railway Vs. Triveni W/O Late Shri ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO3792013 % 18.02.2014 UOI THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER NORTHERN RAILWAY ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amit Dubey, Adv. versus TRIVENI W/O LATE SHRI RAM ..... Respondent Through: Mr. D.K.Sharma with Ms. Nidhi Vashistha, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Strange are the ways in which Government Departments work. In this case the concerned Government Department is the Railways. All I can state is that for no reason frivolous and irresponsible appeals are filed, and the Court fails to understand on the basis of what and whose legal opinion. I am forced to make these observations because there are cases in which on even a cursory assessment of the impugned judgment, a reasonable view could have been taken for not filing of this appeal, however, I note that routinely appeals are being filed. FAO3792013 This appeal as the discussion below Page 1 of 9 demonstrates, a total...
Food Corporation of India Workers Union Vs. Food Corporation of India ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:18. h February, 2014. + CS(OS) 348/2004 & I.A. No.692/2014 (of D-1 for dismissal of suit) FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA WORKERS UNION .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Rajiv Talwar and Mr. Nipu Patiri, Advocates. Versus FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA (HANDLING) WORKERS UNION & ANR. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bahl, Mr. Chandan Kumar and Mr. Eklavya Bahl, Advocates for D-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The plaintiff Union has instituted this suit, (i) for permanent injunction restraining the defendant No.1 Union, its office bearers and members from using or carrying on trade union activities under the name of Food Corporation of India (Handling) Workers Union and using the logo as appearing in its Letter Heads; and, (ii) for declaration, declaring the registration of the defendant No.1 Union under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 as nullity, being in violation of Section 7 of the said Act.2. The suit was entertained.3. On...
The New India Assurance Co Ltd Vs. Smt Mainwati and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO2122013 % 18.02.2014 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. versus SMT MAINWATI & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Pratima N. Chauhan with Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 against the impugned order of the Commissioner dated 22.11.2012 by which the Commissioner allowed the claim of interest and penalty under Section 4A of the Act.2. Para 2 of the impugned order records that the appellant/Insurance Company did not appear in the proceedings and did not file any reply in the Section 4A petition i.e the proceedings under Section 4A remain uncontested.3. The proceedings under Section 4A are consequential and supplemental proceedings to the main proceedings of grant of compensation under Section 10 of the Act. After compensat...
Larsen and Toubro Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Value Added Tax and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:18. 02.2014 + W.P.(C) 3715/2013, C.M. APPL.6951/2013 LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD. ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Rajesh Jain, Sh. Virag Tiwari and Sh. K.J.Bhat, Advocates. Versus COMMISSIONER OF VALUE ADDED TAX & ANR. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Sushil Dutt Salwan, Addl. Standing Counsel, for GNCT with Sh. Divy Pratap, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the two orders, i.e. dated 23.04.2013 and 15.05.2013 issued by the respondents (hereafter referred to as the VAT Commissioner), proposing to conduct special audit under Section 58A of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (DVAT) for the years 2011-12 and 2012-13. W.P.(C) 3715/2013 Page 1 2. The petitioner argues that the notice was not preceded by any Show Cause Notice eliciting its views and representation to the prop...
Zte Corporation Vs. the Commissioner of Customs (import and General) a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:18. 02.2014 + W.P.(C) 8229/2013 ZTE CORPORATION ..Petitioner Through: Sh. Arun Kathpalia and Sh. Dhrupad Das, Advocates. Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT & GENERAL) AND ORS. ..Respondents Through: Sh. Satish Kumar, Sr. Standing Counsel, Sh. Sumeet Pushkarna, CGSC with Ms. Aditi Mohan, Advocate, for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The petitioner seeks appropriate directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to the respondents, including Customs authorities, to permit it to re-export Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH) Transmission Equipment, which had been brought into the country.2. The facts necessary to decide the case are that M/s. Etisalat DB Telecom Pvt. Ltd. the third respondent (hereafter Etisalat) had placed a Purchase Order No.(hereafter PO) dated 16.09.2009 for W.P.(C) 8229/2013 Page 1 supply of Microwave ...
Gaurav Kapoor and ors. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % FAO No.401/2010 18th February, 2014 GAURAV KAPOOR & ORS. Through: ......Appellants Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. for Mr. Naveet Goyal, Adv. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA Through: ...... Respondent Mr. Sharat Kapoor, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This first appeal is filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act,1987 impugning the judgment of the Tribunal dated 22.7.2010 which has dismissed the claim petition filed by the applicants/claimants by holding that the deceased Smt. Ramesh Rani was not a bonafide passenger at the Shivaji Bridge Railway Station from where the train Paschim Express was sought to be boarded for travel to Ludhiana.2. The facts as found by the Railway Claims Tribunal are that the deceased Smt. Ramesh Rani alongwith her minor daughter Baby Priya were to travel from New Delhi to Ludhiana by a train No.2497, but since they missed the...
M/S Balaji Sales Corporation and ors. Vs. Him Alloys and Steels Privat ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl.M.C. No.3172/2012 & Crl.M.A. No.16348/2012 Reserved on:3. d February, 2014 % Date of Decision:18. h February, 2014 M/S BALAJI SALES CORPORATION & ORS. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Nanda K. Jha, Adv. Versus HIM ALLOYS & STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Anil Gera, Adv. for R-1 Mr. Karan Singh, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH1 JUDGMENT This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as `Cr.P.C.) against the impugned order dated 11.11.2010 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (C-02), Delhi whereby the petitioners have been summoned for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act) in a complaint case No.2587/1/11 titled as `M/s Him Alloys & Steels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Balaji Sales Corporation & Ors. and order dated 11.1.2012 whereby notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C....
Vishal Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:18. 02.2014 + W.P.(C) 1147/2014, C.M. APPL. 2393/2014 & 2394/2014 VISHAL KUMAR ..Appellant Through: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Ms. Kavita Jha and Sh. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Advocates. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR. ..Respondents Through: Ms. Suruchii Aggarwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. This writ petition impugns an order under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) passed by the CIT (XVI), New Delhi, as a result of which jurisdiction over the writ petitioner (i.e. the assessee) has been transferred from the DCIT, Circle 48(1), New Delhi to the ACIT, Central Circle, Noida.2. On 9.10.2013, the CIT, New Delhi issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner under Section 127 of the Act proposing the transfer, in the following terms: W.P.(C)1147/2014 Page 1 It is proposed to transfer your case from Delhi to Faridabad....
Ramubhai Kariyabhai Patel and Others Union of India and Others
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
1. The Applicants claim to be farmers and residents of village Kalvad, District Valsad (Gujarat). The Applicants are aggrieved by damage caused to their agricultural fields and surrounding environment because of the toxic waste spread and spilled on 17.7.2012, resulting from improper handling of Hazardous Waste at the Common Hazardous Waste Treatment Storage and Disposal Facility (CHWTSDF) site at Vapi and also the pollution caused due to the said spillage. The present Application is filed under Section 14 and 15 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, since it involves substantial question relating to environment and also involves the prayer for restitution of the environment and compensation commensurate to the damage done to the ecology. 2. The Applicants submit that a Common Effluent Treatment Plant (CETP) and a Common Hazardous Waste Treatment Storage and Disposal Facility (CHWTSDF) has been provided in Vapi Industrial area which are developed, managed and operated by Vapi Waste...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »