Delhi Court March 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.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kanta and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % FAO No.14/2012 12th March, 2014 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ......Appellant Through: Mr. D.D.Singh, Adv and Mr. Navdeep Singh, Adv. VERSUS KANTA & ANR. ...... Respondents Through: 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 order of the Commissioner dated 19.10.2011 which has directed payment of interest under Section 4A of the Act by the appellant-insurance company on the compensation amount awarded.2. It is the undisputed position in law and now settled by various Supreme Court judgments that proceedings under Section 4-A are consequential proceedings on first the compensation amount being determined under Section 4 of the Act. After determination of compensation under Section 4 of the Act, then, the show cause notice is issued to the employer and the insurance company if the...
M/S. Security Development Services P. Ltd. Vs. Govt. of Nct and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on March 04, 2014 Judgment Delivered on March 12, 2014 + W.P.(C) No.5574/1999 SPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Anil Grover, Advocate with Ms.Noopur Singhal, Advocate Versus LABOUR COMMISSIONER, DELHI ADMN. AND ORS ...... Respondent Through: None for R1, 4 and 5 Mr.Varun Prasad, Advocate for R2 Mr.R.R.Ojha, Advocate for R3 + W.P.(C) No.2482/2002 SPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Anil Grover, Advocate with Ms.Noopur Singhal, Advocate Versus DELHI ADMINISTRATION AND ORS. ..... Respondent Through: None for R1 and R2 Mr.Varun Prasad, Advocate for R3 Mr.R.R.Ojha, Advocate for R4 None for R5 and R6 None for R7 + W.P.(C) No.5745/1999 M/S. SECURITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES P. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.R.R.Ojha, Advocate Versus GOVT. OF NCT AND ORS. Through: ...... Respondent None for R1 to R4 Mr.Varun Prasad, Advocate for R5 Mr.Anil Grover, Advocate with Ms.Noopur Singhal, Advocate for R6 ...
Ms. Krishna and anr. Vs. Smt. Shoma Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.78/2014 12th March, 2014 % MS. KRISHNA & ANR. Through: ......Appellants Ms. Puja Dewan, Advocate. VERSUS SMT. SHOMA DEVI ...... Respondent Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. No.4701/2014 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. + RSA No.78/2014 and C.M. No.4700/2014 (stay) 2. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed against the judgment of the first appellate court dated 13.12.2013.3. Trial court had decreed the suit for possession filed by the plaintiff-mother against the appellants/defendants/daughters under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC inasmuch as the appellants/defendants admitted that mother was the owner of the property and the only defence was that the appellants/defendants were not licencees in the suit property as claimed by the mother-plaintiff. Trial co...
Delhi Administration Vs. Sanjay Nagar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
R-49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on :06. 03.2014 Judgment delivered on:12. 03.2014 CRL.A. 172/2006 DELHI ADMINISTRATION Through ..... Appellant Mr.Navin K.Jha, APP. versus SANJAY NAGAR ..... Respondent Through Mr.D.K.Mathur, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 30.9.2004 whereby respondent has been acquitted of the offence under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the PFA). 2 The case of the complainant is that on 18.4.1995 at about 8.00 a.m. Inspector Dharam Pal Singh (PW-2) had purchased a sample of cow milk from the appellant Sanjay Nagar from his shop at Nagar Dairy, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi where the said food article was stored for sale. A sample consisting of 750 ml cow milk was taken from an open drum having label declaration of Cows Milk. Crl.A. No.172/2006 The sample was Page 1 of 12 divided into three equa...
National Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Subhash Gupta and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
$~R1B * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:12. h March, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 649/2005 & CM No.10642/2005 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Prapeep Gaur, Advocate. Versus SUBHASH GUPTA & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP. 649/2005 1. The instant appeal is preferred against the award dated 16.02.2005, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded compensation for a sum of Rs.1,41,320/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. The main ground taken in the instant appeal is that the accident had taken place on 30.01.2003 and on the said date, the offending vehicle was not insured with the appellant/Insurance Company. Despite, Ld. Tribunal has directed the appellant to pay the compensation amount in favour of the claimant even without granting recovery rights against respondent No.2, i....
Vivek Diwan (Director Abhiyan Travels and Tours (i) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dr. ...
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
Salma Noor, Member: 1. In a complaint case bearing No.C-186/2010 State vs. Shri Abhiyan Travels and Tours (I) Pvt. Ltd. filed before District Forum-II, Udyog Sadan, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi, 4.1.2012 was fixed for appearance of the OP whenthe OP did not appear and the Forum ordered to proceed ex-parte against the OP. Thereafter restoration application filed by the OP was also dismissed vide order dated 3.7.2012 as the Forum had no jurisdiction to recall its own order. 2. That is what brings the Appellant/OP in appeal before this Commission for setting aside the said ex-parte order. 3. We have heard Shri Niranjan, Counsel for the Appellant in this appeal at the admission stage as there is no need to hear the respondent. 4. The version of the appellant OP for his non appearance on 4.1.2012 is that the counsel who was representing his case before the Forum was out of station on that day and that his how the default occurred. There is no plausible reason to disbelieve or not to ...
M/S. Maurya Brothers and Others Vs. Cce, Allahabad and Others
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
G. Raghuram, J. 1. Revenue has filed this application bunching appeals involving substantially similar matrix and facts of law and seeking early disposal of the appeals filed by the several appellants assessees in 2012, on the ground that the appeals are covered against the /assessees and in favour of Revenue, vide the final order of this Tribunal in M/s Neelav Jaiswal and Brothers Vs. CCE, Allahabad vide Appeal No. ST/2648/2012-CU(DB) 2. Shri Laxmikumaran and Sreedharan are the Counsel representing the several appellants/assessees. Shri B.L. Narasimhan, ld. Counsel representing the Counsel for the appellants fairly concedes that position that the issues presented in all the appeals are covered against the appellants by the judgment of this Tribunal in M/s Neelav Jaiswal and Brothers Vs. CCE Allahabad, vide the judgment dated 22.7.2013 in ST/2648/2012-CU(DB). In the light of the assertion by ld. DR Shri Dixit and the statement on beha...
M/S Swastik Polytex Pvt Ltd Vs. Oriental Insurance Company
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1480/2010 % Judgment dated 12.03.2014 M/S SWASTIK POLYTEX PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff Through : Mr. Mukesh Sharma, Adv. versus ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY ..... Defendant Through : Mr. Bhaskar Tiwari, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.1,24,11,770/-. Issues were framed in this case on 09.10.2013. Issue No.2, which is to be treated as a preliminary issue, reads as under:(ii) Whether this Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present suit?. OPP2. The necessary facts to be noticed for disposal of issue No.2 are that the plaintiff is a Company carrying on its business at Udaipur. The plaintiff Company had obtained a loan from State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur from Udaipur and the Bank had financed running the business of the plaintiff. The plaintiff got insured the factory building, plant machineries, electronic and other installations...
Manoj Kumar Samdaria Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-i
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:12. 03.2014 + ITA972014 & C.M. APPL. 4132/2014 & 4133/2014 MANOJ KUMAR SAMDARIA ..Appellant Through: Sh. Vikas Jain, Advocate. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I ..Respondent Through: Sh. Sanjeev Sabharwal, 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. The appellant- hereafter called the assessee impugns an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 05-10-2012 whereby the latter allowed the revenues appeal and upset the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). It is argued that having regard to the circumstances, the substantial question of law is that the Tribunal fell into error in holding that the profit derived from the sale of shares for AY200708 was not short term capital gain, but business income.2. In the return, the assessee, for the year 2007-08 claimed that 65,45,321/- had to be treated as short term ...
M/S Goldsquare Sales India Pvt Ltd Vs. Rahul Narvekar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
$~37. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1377/2012 % Judgment dated 12.03.2014 M/S GOLDSQUARE SALES INDIA PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff Through : Mr.Sanjeev Sindhwani, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Khalid Arshad, Adv. versus RAHUL NARVEKAR Through : ..... Defendant Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) I.A. 21227/2013.1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit under the provisions of Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure for recovery of Rs.50.00 lakhs.2. As per the plaint, the present suit is based on an Agreement entered into between the parties on 1.7.2011 wherein the defendant has admitted the receipt and his liability to repay Rs.50.00 lakhs, which was received by him as a loan from the plaintiff.3. Summons in the suit were issued in the prescribed form.4. The present application, being I.A.No.21227/2013, has been filed by defendant seeking leave to defend.5. Before dealing with the rival submissions of counsel for the parties, it would ...
- ‹ Prev
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- Next ›
- Last »