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.
Kayyum Vs. State Govt.of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : February 25, 2014 + CRL.A. 361/2011 KAYYUM ..... Appellant Through : Mr.K.B.Andley, Sr.Advocate with Mr.M.L.Yadav and Mohd.Shamikh, Advocates. VERSUS STATE GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Kayyum (the appellant) impugns the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 18.11.2010 in Sessions Case No.43/09 arising out of FIR No.425/2002 registered at Police Station New Seelam Pur by which he was held guilty for committing offence under Section 307 IPC and 25 Arms Act. By an order on sentence dated 19.11.2010, he was awarded RI for seven years with fine `5,000/- under Section 307 IPC and RI for one year with fine `1,000/- under Section 25 Arms Act.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on 08.12.2002 at 02.45 p.m. in front of MCD office near Pragati Library, Double Storey, Seelam Pur, he inflicted injuries to Mohd.Firoz Khan by fi...
Dr.Satish Kumar Vs. Shiv Kumar and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: February 25, 2014 + RFA (OS) 154/2013 DR.SATISH KUMAR Represented by: .....Appellant Mr.S.S.Jain, Advocate with Ms.Veena Rupara, Mr.Nikesh Jain and Ms.Himani Gupta, Advocates versus SHIV KUMAR & ANR. Represented by: .....Respondents None CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT NATH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) CM No.19350/2013 Allowed subject to just exceptions. CM No.19352/2013 For the reasons stated in the application the delay of 49 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. CM No.19351/2013 For the reasons stated in the application time is extended for filing the court fee in appeal till when it was filed on November 25, 2013. RFA (OS) No.154/2013 1. The cacophony in paragraph 2 of the plaint, wherein it is pleaded that Sh.Jiya Lal S/o Sh.Neki Ram is the grandfather as well as the adoptive father of the appellant the plaintiff, becomes audible music after grappling and jostling with learne...
Sikender Vs. State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:25. 02.2014 % + CRL.A. 686/2013 YASEEN Through: ..... Appellant Mr. S.C. Sagar, Adv. versus STATE + Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi,APP for State Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Inderjeet Sidhu and Ms. Shiba Batra, Advs. CRL.A. 855/2013 SIKENDER versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi,APPfor State CRL.A. 1359/2013 MAMUN @ ABDUL RASHID Through: versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Aishwarya Rao, Adv. ..... Respondent Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi,APP for State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(ORAL) On 23.01.2010, the complainant Amarjit Singh, a resident of house no.F-107, East of Kailash, New Delhi came to the police station Amar Colony and submitted a complaint with respect to the robbery which had taken place in his house in the night intervening 22/23.01.2010. He stated that during the aforesaid night, he was sleeping in his bedroom on the s...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rajesh Kumar Kherwar and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.497/2012 25th February, 2014 % NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Manish Kaushik, Advocate. Versus RAJESH KUMAR KHERWAR AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. T. Mitra, Advocate for respondent No.2 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 against the judgment of the Commissioner dated 13.9.2012 which has allowed the claim petition of the respondent No.1/herein.2. The claim petition of the respondent No.1 herein was allowed on the ground that he was working as a Driver with the respondent No.2 herein who admitted the relationship of employer and employee. 5568 on 26.1.2011. As a result of the injury, respondent no.1s right leg was amputed below the knee. FIR No.19/2011 was lodged in police station Barkhata, Distt. Hazaribagh, Jharkhand with respect to the accide...
Kuldeep Balhara Vs. Manoj Kumar and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: February 25, 2014 + C.R.P. 160/2012 & C.M. No.21293/2012 KULDEEP BALHARA Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Ravi Gupta, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Ankit Jain, Adv. along with petitioner in person. versus MANOJ KUMAR & ANR Through ..... Respondents Mr.Akhilesh Arora, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. By way of the present petition under Section 115 CPC, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 28th August, 2012 passed by the learned Trial Court in a suit for restoration of possession filed by the petitioner under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act in respect of the property bearing flat No.B- 947, 1st Floor, Sector-1, Avantika, Rohini, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the suit property).2. Brief facts for the purpose of adjudication of the present petition are that the petitioner had filed a suit for restoration of possession against the respondents stating that the petitioner had purchased the suit...
M/S. Kostub Investment Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. 01.2014 Pronounced on:25. 02.2014 + ITA102014 M/S. KOSTUB INVESTMENT LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Ram Avtar Bansal and Sh. Naman Nayak, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Sh. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel with Sh. Ruchir Bhatia, Jr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The present appeal is directed against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 09.01.2012, and involves decisions on the following question of law framed at the time of admission: ITA102014 Page 1 Did the Tribunal fall into error of law in holding that the appellants claim that the amount has been spent during the Assessment Year 2006-07, for the higher education of Sh. Dushyant Poddar, a son of its Director, was not liable as business expenditure under Section...
Utkarsh Vs. Delhi Bar Association
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment pronounced on: February 25, 2014 I.A. No.20968/2013, I.A. No.414/2014 & I.A. No.415/2014 in CS(OS) 2625/2013 UTKARSH Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Kirti Uppal, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Nikhil Kharbanda & Mr.Anshumaan Sahni, Advs. versus DELHI BAR ASSOCIATION ..... Defendant Through Mr.R.K.Sharma, Adv. with Mr.Nithin Ahlawat, Mr.Rajeev Rathi, Ms.Dezy Gaur and Mr.Rajiv Khosla, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff, a practicing advocate, has filed the present suit against the defendant, Delhi Bar Association, for mandatory injunction.2. It the case of the plaintiff that the defendant is governed by a Constitution which is amended from time to time and that the last amendment was carried out by the general body of the defendant in its meeting on 12th January, 2010. As per the Constitution of the defendant, the defendant has to be governed by a committee elected by the members of the defendant in the el...
Giri Raj Vs. Sheela Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: February 25, 2014 + RC. Rev. No.328/2012 & C.M. No.12383/2012 GIRI RAJ Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Ravi Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Sumit Tomar, Adv. versus SHEELA DEVI Through ..... Respondent Mr.Sugriva Dubey, Adv. with Mr.V.K. Kalra, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioner by way of the present petition under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has assailed the eviction order dated 7th April 2012 passed by the learned Additional Rent Controller, Central, Delhi.2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent filed an eviction petition against the petitioner in respect of a Shop bearing No.1319, Mohalal Sang Trashan, Bagichi Ram Chand, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the tenanted shop). It was the case of the respondent that the tenanted shop was let out to one Sh.Ram Chander son of Sh.Koki Mal who died and...
Mangal SaIn @ Monu Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : February 20, 2014 DECIDED ON : February 25, 2014 + CRL.A. 216/2012 & CRL.M.B. 1879/2013 MANGAL SAIN @ MONU Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate. Versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : + Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CRL.A. 254/2012 MONU ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Vivek Bansal, Advocate. Versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. AND + CRL.A. 217/2012 TINKU ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate. Versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Crl.A.No.216/2012 & connected appeals CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Mangal Sain @ Monu (A-1), Monu (A-2), Tinku (A-3) and Krishan @ Changa (A-4) were arrested in case FIR No.120/2008 registered at Police Station Gokal Puri and sent for trial alleging that on the night intervening 12/13.05.2008 at about 12.30 a.m. at fly-over near Kanpur, Delhi, Goods Carrier Ltd., Gokul Puri, they in furtherance of common intention robb...
United India Insurance Co.Ltd Vs. Gori Shanker and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:25. h February, 2014 FAO7242003 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. versus GORI SHANKER & OTHERS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. G.S. Sharma, Adv. for R1. Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. for R2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM. No.10586/2007 1. Vide the instant application, the applicant / respondent No.2 has filed cross-objection to the instant appeal. Same has been admitted vide order dated 03.09.2009.2. The Registry of this Court is directed to register the instant application as a separate MAC Appeal and re-notify on 02.05.2014.3. In view of the above, the instant application stands disposed of. + FAO7242003 1. The instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 30.08.2003, whereby Ld. Tribunal has directed the appellant to pay the compensation amount in favour of the respondent / claimant with recovery rights again...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »