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.
Lady Harding Medical College and Smt.Sucheta Kriplan Vs. Shri Rakesh K ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.498/2011 4th February, 2014 % LADY HARDING MEDICAL COLLEGE & SMT. SUCHETA KRIPLANI HOSPITAL ......Appellant Through: Mr. R.V. Sinha, Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocates VERSUS SHRI RAKESH KUMAR ...... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjiv Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.1 with respondent No.1 in person. 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 judgment of the Commissioner dated 18.4.2011 which has allowed the compensation claim filed by the respondent herein.2. The facts of the case are that respondent was admittedly a temporary status employee of the appellant when on 5.4.2004 while working on shredder machine he got injured and four fingers of his left hand were cut down resulting in permanent partial disablement. The respondent accordingly filed the claim petition before the Commi...
Minati Bose Vs. State of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.459/2011 % MINATI BOSE Through:4. h February, 2014 ......Appellant Ms. Jasvinder Kaur, Advocate and Mr. Jogesh, Advocate. VERSUS STATE OF DELHI & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the court below dated 4.8.2011 by which the petition for letters of administration filed by the appellant has been dismissed. Petition for letters of administration was dismissed basically because according to the court below appellant had not proved the original Will dated 15.11.1981 by which the property was bequeathed in favour of the husband of the appellant, of which letters of administration was sought and there was lack of proper evidence in proof of the copy of the Will.2. I may note that in the petition for letters of administration, in spite of service of notices, no one appeared fo...
Sagar Takwal Vs. the State (Delhi Admn.) Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :6. h DECEMBER, 2013 DECIDED ON :4. h FEBRUARY, 2014 + CRL.A. 492/2000 & CRL.M.A. 2835/2005 SAGAR TAKWAL Through : ....Appellant Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr.Advocate with Mr.M.L.Yadav & Mr.Lokesh , Advocates. versus THE STATE (DELHI ADMN.) DELHI .Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. + CRL.A. 479/2000 MOHD. RASHEED Through : ....Appellant Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr.Advocate with Mr.M.L.Yadav & Mr.Lokesh , Advocates. versus STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) .Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. + CRL.A. 566/2000 MOHD. ARFEEN & ANR. ....Appellants Through : Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr.Advocate with Mr.M.L.Yadav & Mr.Lokesh , Advocates. versus STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) .Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. AND + CRL.A. 59/2001 STATE Through : . Appellant Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. versus SAGAR TAKWAL & ORS. ....Respondents Through : Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr.Advocate with Mr.M.L.Yadav & Mr.Lokesh , Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. ...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Dhan Raj Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on February 04, 2014 + W.P.(C) 17142/2004 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Anand Nandan, Advocate Versus DHAN RAJ SINGH AND ANR. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Anil Mittal with Mr. Anuj Kumar Ranjan, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.(Oral) 1. The challenge by Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) in this writ petition is to the order dated April 23, 2001 in O.P. No.242/93, whereby the application filed by the petitioner-DTC under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act, in short) seeking approval of the Industrial Tribunal (Tribunal, in short) for removing the respondent i.e. Late Dhan Raj Singh (represented through legal heirs) from service, was rejected.2. The brief facts are, Late Dhan Raj Singh was employed as Conductor in DTC. For certain alleged misconduct, he was issued a charge sheet on December 07, 1992 by the Depot Manager, Keshavpur Depot...
Hari Milan Goswami Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.132/2009 4th February, 2014 % HARI MILAN GOSWAMI Through: ......Appellant Mr. P.S. Vats, Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Gupta, Advocate. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ...... Respondent Through: 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 impugns the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 18.12.2004 and the appellate court dated 8.9.2006; by which the suit of the appellant/plaintiff for setting aside the orders passed by the departmental authorities was dismissed.2. In the suit, the relevant issues which were framed were issue Nos.1 and 2 and which read as under:1. Whether the order No.5 BN-12/74-9048/20/30 November 74 and order No.5 BN/B/PRO-4/74/75/433/1334 dated 10.2.75 is illegal and without jurisdiction?. OPD2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to refer to cost of Rs.11,495/OPP3. With respect to these issues the trial court h...
P P Jewellers Pvt Ltd Vs. Modern New Kapoor Jewellers Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
$~ 12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1009/2012 % Order dated 04.02.2014 P P JEWELLERS PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr.Karan Jain, Advocate versus MODERN NEW KAPOOR JEWELLERS PVT LTD..... Defendant Through: Mr.Manish Srivastava, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit under the provisions of Order 37 CPC for recovery of Rs.81.72 lacs with pendente lite and future interest. As per the plaint, the business transaction between the plaintiff and the defendant took place against plaintiffs two invoices being No.02585 dated 1.7.2010 and the invoice no.02879 dated 14.7.2010. The invoices were signed by the director of the defendant company i.e. Sita Ram Kapoor in acknowledgment of purchasing new ornaments, which were duly described in the invoices which reads as under: Invoice Description 02585 New Ornaments purity 1,08,59,954/22Cts. + Vat @ 1% 1,08,600 Gross Weight (Gms) 5736.460 Total Dated 01.07.2...
Shri Madan Singh and ors. Vs. Shri Ladli Pershad Jaiswal (Through Lrs) ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RSA Nos.48-50/2006 & 45-47/2006 4th February, 2014 % 1. RSA No.48-50/2006 SHRI MADAN SINGH AND ORS. ......Appellants Through: Mr. P. N. Bhardwaj, Advocate. VERSUS SHRI LADLI PERSHAD JAISWAL (THROUGH LRS) AND ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. B.K.Sood, Advocate.2. RSA No.45-47/2006 SHRI MADAN SINGH AND ORS. ......Appellants Through: Mr. P.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate. VERSUS SHRI LADLI PERSHAD JAISWAL (THROUGH LRS) AND ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. B.K. Sood, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) RSA No.48-50/2006 and C.M. No.1955/2006 (stay) 1. This Regular Second Appeal impugns the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 31.1.2000 and the appellate court dated 16.9.2005; by which the suit of the respondents/plaintiffs for possession with respect to property bearing No.476, Haveli Haider Quli, Chandni Chowk, Delhi has been decreed.2. ...
Godrej Consumer Products Ltd Vs. Controller of Legal Metrology and ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:4. h February, 2014 + W.P(Crl.)1223/2011 GODREJ CONSUMER PRODUCTS LTD .... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Tyagi, Advocate versus CONTROLLER OF LEGAL METROLOGY & ORS. .... Respondent Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, ASC + W.P(Crl.)1259/2012 GODREJ CONSUMER PRODUCTS LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Tyagi, Advocate versus CONTROLLER OF LEGAL METROLOGY & ORS...... Respondent Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, ASC CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Vide this common order, I shall dispose of two writ petitions bearing No.WP(Crl.) 1223/2011 and WP(Crl.) 1259/2012 as both the writ petitions are between the same parties and substantially common question of law is involved in both the petitions.2. The petition bearing No.WP(Crl.) 1223/2011 u/S482Cr.P.C. r/w Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for issuing writ of mandamus, certiorari or any other appropriate writ, ord...
The Commissioner of Income Tax-v Vs. M/S Quantum Coders Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:04. 02.2014 + ITA5422013 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus M/S QUANTUM CODERS 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) 1. The question of law sought to be urged in this case is whether the interpretation given to Section 10A, particularly, sub-section (2) by the Tribunal is correct and justified.2. The assessee/respondent reported NIL income for the AY2007 08 relying upon the approval for setting up Software Technology Parks in India by virtue of a certificate dated 8.12.2006 issued to it.3. It claimed deduction of `38,98,220/- in respect of the income from software exports for the entire previous year, i.e., 1.4.2006 to 31.3.2007. The AO relied upon the condition in the letter of permission which stated that it was valid for three years from t...
M/S. Parsons Nutrionals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Ghaziabad
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
Archana Wadhwa, J. 1. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of biscuits, which are being sold by them to M/s. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Healthcare Ltd., Ghaziabad, who are marketing the same. 2. The appellants were clearing the said biscuits on payment of duty @ 10.3% prior to 24.02.2009. Vide Board Notification No.4/2009-CE, dated 24.02.2009, The rate of duty was reduced from 10.3% to 8.24% with effect from 24.02.2009. However, without realising the issuance of the said Notification bringing down the rate of duty, the appellant contributed to clear their goods till 31.03.2009 on payment of higher rate of duty. 3. Subsequently, the appellant filed a refund claim of Rs.1,59,119/- (Rupees one lakh fifty nine thousand one hundred and nineteen only) on 10.03.2010 in respect of excise duty paid by them in the month of March, 2009. They also produced a letter dated 31.03.2010 from their buyer M/s. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Healthcare Ltd. indicating that in respect of excise invoic...
- ‹ Prev
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 52
- 53
- 54
- Next ›
- Last »