Delhi Court February 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 3 of about 540 results (0.035 seconds)Mukesh Singh Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: February 28, 2014 + CRL.A. 1246/2011 MUKESH SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate Versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through + ..... Respondent Ms. Richa Kapoor, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. CRL.A. 1123/ 2012 VIJAY@ Kalia Through: Appellant Ms. Nandita Rao, Advocate Versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through ..... Respondent Ms. Richa Kapoor, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT KAILASH GAMBHIR, J1 By these appeals filed under section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), the appellants seek to challenge the impugned judgment dated 08.04.2011 and order on sentence dated 27th April 2011 whereby the Appellant Vijay is convicted for committing an offence punishable under Sections 392/394/397/307/ 302 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as IPC...
Tag this Judgment!Menka Devi and ors. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % FAO No.131/2011 28th February, 2014 MENKA DEVI & ORS. Through: ......Appellants Mr. Davinder Nath Dewan, Adv. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA Through: ...... Respondent Mr. J.P.Sharma, 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 Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 impugning the judgment of the Tribunal dated 13.8.2010 by which the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellants/applicants who are the dependants of the deceased Sh.Lal Dev Prasad. Appellant no.1 is the widow of late Sh. Lal Dev Prasad.2. The facts of the case as pleaded by the appellants/applicants were that Sh. Lal Dev Prasad on 26.2.2009 was travelling from Kodrama to New Delhi by train 2381 Poorva Express when near the Khurja railway station(Davar Station), he fell down from the train and died. The case of the respondent/Railways before the Railway C...
Tag this Judgment!Sandeep Chopra Vs. M/S. Fashionite Impex Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.62/2013 and C.M. No.4826/2013 (stay) 28th February, 2014 % SANDEEP CHOPRA Through: ......Appellant Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. VERSUS M/S. FASHIONITE IMPEX PVT. LTD. Through: None. ...... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Counsel for the appellant, on instructions from the appellant who is present in person, confines the relief in this appeal as also in the suit to the grant of 26 days salary i.e from 1.8.2008 to 26.8.2008, and for which period the appellant worked with the respondent/defendant. It is also prayed that the costs imposed by the first appellate court against the appellant be waived especially because appellant is entitled to the relief of grant of salary of 26 days.2. The facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs.1,28,067/- against the respondent/defendant/employer. This amount of Rs.1,28,067/...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Ram Sevak
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.461/2012 28th February, 2014 % UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Advocate. Versus RAM SEVAK ..... Respondent Through: None. 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 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 impugning the judgment of the Tribunal which has allowed the claim petition filed by the respondent/claimant, for the grievous injuries causing amputation of both his legs, suffered on 3.8.2009, while travelling from Shamli to Saharanpur in a passenger train.2. Railway Claims Tribunal holds that the respondent was a bonafide passenger inasmuch as the ticket was placed on record as Ex.A2. The Tribunal has reckoned as minor the difference in timings of the train having started from Shamli at 6.00 P.M as claimed by respondent but ticket having been purchased at 7.40 PM and which finding, in my opini...
Tag this Judgment!Ajeet Singh @ Jeet Singh Vs. National Insurance Co Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h February, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 309/2012 AJEET SINGH @ JEET SINGH ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. Versus NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr. Manoj R. Sinha, Advocate for Respondent No.1. 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 :1. 2.3. PECUNIARY DAMAGES: Towards functional disability : Towards medical expenses : Towards not being able to do his Duties for 6 months : TOTAL : MAC. Appeal No.309/2012 Rs.10,000/Rs.10,000/- Rs.2,00,000/- Rs.2,15,804/Rs.8673/Rs.23,508/Rs.4,67,985/- Page 1 of 4 2. Vide this ap...
Tag this Judgment!State Govt. of Nct of Delhi Vs. Rajan @ Raja
Court: Delhi
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:28. h February, 2014 + CRL.L.P. 229/2012 STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State. versus RAJAN @ RAJA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Neeraj Bhardwaj, Advocate, DHCLSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT SANJIV KHANNA J.(ORAL) 1. This Criminal Leave Petition is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 22.12.2010 passed in Sessions Case No.10 of 2010 arising out of FIR No.265/2009, Police Station Kotwali under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). By the impugned judgment, the Respondent herein Rajan @ Raja has been acquitted for the charge of having committed murder of his wife Shakuni with the broken piece of glass on 27.09.2009 on the footpath near Bankhundi Mandir.2. We have heard, Mr. Rajat Katyal, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Neeraj Bhardwaj, Amicus Curiae, who appears for the...
Tag this Judgment!Nippon Soda Co. Ltd. Vs. V.P. Goyal and anr
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:28. h February, 2014. % + CS(OS) 2011/2010 & CC No.4/2011 NIPPON SODA CO. LTD. Through: ..... Plaintiff Ms. Vaishali Mittal and Gurpreet Singh Kahloni, Advocates. Versus V.P. GOYAL AND ANR Through: ..... Defendants Mr. S.K. Bansal, Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Mr. Pankay Kumar, Mr. Santosh Kumar, Mr. Vikash Khera and Mr. Amit Chanchal Jha, Advocates. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J I.A. No.3404/2013 (of plaintiff u/S124of Trademarks Act, 1999) 1. The plaintiff in this suit for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from infringing the trademark TOPSIN of the plaintiff and passing off their goods as that of the plaintiff seeks stay under Section 124(1)(i) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 of proceedings in the suit as well as in the counter claim filed by the defendants.2. The counsel for both the defendants has contested the application on three grounds. Firstly, that for a stay to be applied fo...
Tag this Judgment!Asha Johri Vs. Neerja Mehta and ors
Court: Delhi
$~06. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 930/2011 % Judgment dated 28.02.2014 ASHA JOHRI Through : ..... Plaintiff Mr.Sukumar Pattjoshi, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Sunil Mund, Mr.Manoj Kumar and Ms.Bedashree, Advs. versus NEERJA MEHTA & ORS Through : ..... Defendants Mr.S.K. Sharma, Mr.Rahul Sharma and Mr.Prayas Aneja, Advs. for defendants no.3 to 6. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit seeking a declaration in her favour that she is the lawful owner of the terrace floor/third floor of the property situated at L-18, Kailash Colony, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the suit property). The plaintiff also seeks permanent injunction restraining defendants from constructing any building till the plaintiffs right to the terrace floor (third floor) in the suit property is acknowledged and reserved.2. Summons in the suit and notice in the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC were issued on 25.4.2011. O...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Gap International Sourcing (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cst, Delhi
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Rakesh Kumar, J. 1. The appellant are a company registered in India and are subsidiary of M/s GAP International Sourcing, Inc., U.S.A. who are a prominent retailer in U.S.A. and other countries. The appellant entered into a service support agreement with M/s GAP, U.S.A. for rendering various services relating to procurement of goods recommending fabrics to be used for manufacture of garments, recommending vendors from which fabrics, yarn, zippers, buttons, snap fasteners etc. can be procured, reporting the status of manufacture of products by the chosen vendors, analyzing the reports of the samples sent by the vendors, giving recommendation about the product integrity, inspecting export consignments and issuing inspection certificates, screening the vendors suitability in terms of child labour norms and pollution control norms and recommending the teams to be engaged in logistic work like transportation, clearing and forwarding etc. for export of the purchased products out of India. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Cce, Ghaziabad and Another Vs. M/S. Met Trade (India) Ltd. and Others
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
D.N. Panda, J. 1. Revenue has come in appeal challenging discharge of liability using Cenvat credit earned on GTA services. Such a contentious issue having been settled by the Honble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Nahar Industrial Enterprises Vs. Union of India reported in 2008 (09) LCX0293 and CCE, Chandighar-II Vs. Dhillon Kool Drinks and Beverages Ltd. - 2008 (229) ELT 193 (PandH) and all the three matters being related to a period prior to April, 2006, all the three appeals are dismissed. 2. Copy of this order be placed in all the three records for reference of record....
Tag this Judgment!