Delhi Court March 2014 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds - plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sangita Garg Vs. Indian Airlines Ltd. (Now Known as Nacil)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:09. 01.2014 Judgment delivered on:31. 03.2014 % + WP(C) No.30/2010 SANGITA GARG .... Petitioner Versus INDIAN AIRLINES LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS NACIL) + .....Respondent WP(C) No.6488/2010 PUNITA BAKSHI .... Petitioner Versus NATIONAL AVIATION COMPANY OF INDIA LTD. (NACIL) .....Respondent + WP(C) No.8111/2011 SONA CHAWLA .... Petitioner Versus INDIAN AIRLINES LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS NACIL) .....Respondent ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE: For the Petitioners: Mr Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate in WP(C) 30/2010 & 8111/2011. Mr Amit Bansal, Advocate in WP(C) 6488/2010. For the Respondents: Mr Kailash Vasdev, Sr. Advocate with Mr Rahul Malhotra, Ms Garima Bose, Ms Ekta Mehta, Mr Shreyans Singhvi & Mr Umrao Singh Rawat, Advocates. CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J1 s fat fit?. At least in the context of the job functions, the petitioners, were required to perform - is the question which is raised in these writ petiti...
Public Works Department Vs. M/S Navayuga Engineering Co Ltd and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:05. 12.2013 Judgment delivered on:31. 03.2014 O.M.P. 420/2012 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Nandita Rao and Ms.Neha Mam, Advocates. versus M/S NAVAYUGA ENGINEERING CO LTD & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Arijit Mazumdar, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. These are objections preferred by the petitioner under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) to the arbitral award dated 26.12.2011 made by Shri S.C. Vasudeva, the Sole Arbitrator, whereby certain claims of the respondent contractor have been allowed and the counter-claim of the petitioner has been rejected.2. The petitioner invited tender for construction of bridge across river Yamuna near Geeta Colony vide the press notification dated 19.07.2004. The estimated cost of work was Rs.90,04,25,485/-. The time allowed for completion of work was thirty six months. The respondent...
Vimla Monga Vs. Ramlubhai
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
$-R-1 & R-2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:26. h March, 2014 Decided on:31. t March, 2014 + CS(OS) 1059/1979 VIMLA MONGA ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Raj Panjwani , Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sonia Singhani, Adv. versus RAMLUBHAI ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Sunil Malhotra and Mr. Amit Sanduja, Advs. AND TEST. CAS. 47/1990 SH. KISHSORI LAL MONGA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sunil Malhotra and Mr. Amit Sanduja, Advs. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Raj Panjwani , Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sonia Singhani, Adv. Coram: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K. PATHAK, J.1. By this judgment aforementioned suit as well as testamentary petition are disposed of together since the disputes involved therein are between the members of same family, inasmuch as, property involved therein is same, that is, House No.A-315, Defence Colony, New Delhi 110003.2. Plaintiff is daughter-in-law of defendant no.1. Defendant no.1 is wife of Late Shri Ajodhia Nath Monga. She died during the pendenc...
Naveen Kumar @ Bawla Vs. State(Nct) of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :31. t March, 2014 + CRL.A. 1306/2012 & Crl.M.B.No.2547/2013 NAVEEN KUMAR @ BAWLA ..... Appellant Through : Mr.B.S.Chowdhary with Mr.Anshul Baranwal, Advocates. versus STATE(NCT) OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. Complainant present in person. + CRL.A. 1307/2012 & Crl.M.B.No.2546/2013 RAJU @ NAGESH ..... Appellant Through : Mr.B.S.Chowdhary with Mr.Anshul Baranwal, Advocates. versus STATE (NCT) OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. Complainant present in person. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Naveen Kumar @ Bawla (A-1) and Raju @ Nagesh (A-2) have filed appeals to challenge the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 17.10.2012 in Sessions Case No.60/09 arising out of a FIR No.538/08 registered at Police Station Sultanpuri, by which they were held guilty for committing offences under Sections 307/34 IPC; 25/27/54/59 Arms Act. By an order on se...
Mrs. Vibha Mehta Vs. M/S. Hotel Marina and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:04. 03.2014 Pronounced on:31. 03.2014 + FAO (OS) 15/2013, C.M. APPL.367/2013, 731/2013 & 11066/2013 MRS. VIBHA MEHTA ..Appellant Through: Sh. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Aankhi Ghosh, Advocate. Versus M/S. HOTEL MARINA & ORS. ..Respondents Through: Sh. J.S. Kochar, Advocate, for Resp. No.2. Sh. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Sh. R.K. Choudhary and Sh. Akshay Sharma, Advocates, for Resp. No.8. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. This is an appeal against an order of a learned Single Judge dismissing an application of the appellant (the plaintiff) seeking the setting aside of a compromise decree. FAO(OS) 15/2013 Page 1 2. The plaintiff had sued the first respondent, M/s Hotel Marina (Marina), a partnership firm of which she and respondents 2-9 (the other defendants) were members. The suit claimed the dissolution of the firm, a decree of rendition of ...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Xv Vs. M/S. Niti Wadhawan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:11. 03.2014 Pronounced on:31. 03.2014 + ITA4832012, C.M. No.14602/2012 (for exemption) & 20240/2013 (for amendment of appeal) NITI WADHAWAN ..Appellant Versus DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-10 + ITA2512013 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX XV ..Respondent ..Appellant Versus M/S. NITI WADHAWAN ..Respondent Through: Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ram Avtar Bansal and Mr. Naman Nayar, Advocates, for Ms. Niti Wadhawan. Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Jr. Standing Counsel, for Revenue. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The following questions of law arise in the present cross appeals by the assessee and the Revenue against a common order of the Income Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 20.04.2012 in IT (SS) A. ITA48312 & ITA25113 Page 1 No 242/Del/2006 and IT (SS) A. No.8/Del/2007. The following questions of law arise for consider...
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kundan and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.207/2013 & C.M. No.7038/2013 (stay) % 31st March, 2014 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ....Appellant Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Advocate. VERSUS KUNDAN AND ANR. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. Surender Kumar Gupta, 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 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the insurance company against the impugned judgment of the Commissioner dated 26.2.2013 by which the Commissioner has allowed the claim petition filed by the respondent no.1 herein.2. The only issue urged before me on behalf of the appellant is that the compensation which is payable under the Act is payable one month after passing of the order by the Commissioner and not from one month after the date of the accident.3. The Division Bench of four Judges of the S...
In the Matter of Rs Livemedia Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ..
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:31. 03.2014 CO.PET.572/2013 IN THE MATTER OF RS LIVEMEDIA PVT. LTD. ........Petitioner Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Ms. Pooja M. Saigal and Ms. Nivedita H.S. Bhaskar for the Petitioner. Mr Atma Sah, Asstt. Registrar of Companies for Regional Director. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner company under Sections 100-104 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) seeking approval/sanction to the proposed reduction of the Subscribed and Paid-up Equity and Preference Share Capital of the petitioner Company.2. The petitioner proposes to reduce its share capital by cancelling a specified number of shares held by certain shareholders. The petitioner has also determined the amounts payable to the shareholders with respect to the shares proposed to be cancelled reduced. A resolution approving the reduction...
Punita Bakshi Vs. National Aviation Company of India Ltd. (Nacil)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:09. 01.2014 Judgment delivered on:31. 03.2014 % + WP(C) No.30/2010 SANGITA GARG .... Petitioner Versus INDIAN AIRLINES LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS NACIL) + .....Respondent WP(C) No.6488/2010 PUNITA BAKSHI .... Petitioner Versus NATIONAL AVIATION COMPANY OF INDIA LTD. (NACIL) .....Respondent + WP(C) No.8111/2011 SONA CHAWLA .... Petitioner Versus INDIAN AIRLINES LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS NACIL) .....Respondent ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE: For the Petitioners: Mr Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate in WP(C) 30/2010 & 8111/2011. Mr Amit Bansal, Advocate in WP(C) 6488/2010. For the Respondents: Mr Kailash Vasdev, Sr. Advocate with Mr Rahul Malhotra, Ms Garima Bose, Ms Ekta Mehta, Mr Shreyans Singhvi & Mr Umrao Singh Rawat, Advocates. CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J1 s fat fit?. At least in the context of the job functions, the petitioners, were required to perform - is the question which is raised in these writ petiti...
Ram Babu Gupta Vs. M/S. Aditya Birla Group and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
$~ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order Reserved on:20. th February, 2014 Order Pronounced on:31. st March, 2014 CS(OS) 632/2013 R AM B ABU G UPTA ..... P LAINTIFF Through: Mr. Rajesh Rai, Advocate with Plaintiff in person. versus M/ S . A DITYA B IRLA G ROUP & ANOTHER Through: .....D EFENDANTS Mr. Navin Advocate Chawla, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.1. The Plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs. 50,00,000/- as damages for illegal termination of employment, arrears of salary, etc. The suit ha d originally been filed only against M/s. Aditya Birla Group.2. The contention of the Plaintiff is that the interview for ===================================================================== the appointment of the Plaintiff was conducted by Mr. Arun Guar and the Plaintiff was appointed by the Defendant with a subsidiary company of the Defendant M/s. Liaoning Birla Carbon Co. Ltd. at China. As per the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff was wrongful...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »