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.
Harvest Securities Pvt Ltd and anr Vs. Bp Singapore Pvt Ltd and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
17 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 103/2013 HARVEST SECURITIES PVT LTD & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Avi Singh & Mr. Aditya V. Singh, Advs. Versus BP SINGAPORE PVT LTD & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Manish K. Jha, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW ORDER % 10.03.2014 IA No.16579/2013 (of the plaintiffs u/O11Rule 1 CPC) 1. During the hearing of this application, it has transpired that the claim of the plaintiffs inter alia is for compensation for slander. A perusal of the plaint shows that the plaintiffs in para No.35 of the plaint have pleaded that the defendants have published slanderous and / or libellous statements in regard to the plaintiff No.2 and which have resulted in the plaintiffs No.2 reputation and goodwill being tarnished and caused economic loss to both the plaintiffs. None of the other paragraphs of the plaint also plead as to what was the slanderous / libellous statement.2. Upon the same being put to the counsel for the p...
M/S Comfort Living Hotels P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-iii
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:10. 03.2014 + ITA672001 M/S COMFORT LIVING HOTELS P. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Prakash Kumar with Mr. Sheel Vardhan, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rohit Madan, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Pabitra Roy Choudhary, Jr. 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 following questions of law arise for consideration: (1) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the sum of Rs. 5 lacs was capital in nature and was not revenue expenditure that could properly be deducted?. (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that no depreciation was allowable on a sum of Rs.3,59,803/claimed as expenditure on temporary constructions?.2. Briefly, the facts are that the assessee was carrying on hospitality business, i.e., managing a hotel. It had claimed during the relevant time in...
Mukesh JaIn Vs. Akash Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
$~ 16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 332/2012 & I.A. 5196/2012 % Judgment dated 10.03.2014 MUKESH JAIN Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr.Vishwender Verma, Adv versus AKASH GUPTA Through: ..... Defendant Mr.Rishi Pal Singh, Adv CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) I.A. 5196/2012 1. This is an application under Order 37 Rule 2 & 3 CPC filed by the defendant for entering appearance.2. Since the defendant has entered appearance through counsel, the present application stands disposed of. IA.No.4062/2013 3. Previous costs imposed have not been paid. The same stands waived of as prayed.4. Plaintiff has filed the present suit under the provisions of Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Memo of appearance was filed and thereafter the plaintiff has filed an application for summons for judgment. Defendant has filed the present application for leave to defend.5. According to the plaint, the plaintiff was desirous of selling gold weighing 2010 gr...
Ram Kumar and ors Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 687/1999 % Date of decision: March 10, 2014 RAM KUMAR & ORS ..... Appellants Through: Mr. R.N. Mittal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Puneet Mittal, Mr. Ankit Goel, Mr. Ankur Aggarwal & Mr. Nitin Sharma, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Jasbir Kaur, APP for State with SI Jagdish, P.S. Najafgarh. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.1. By way of present appeal, challenge has been made to judgment dated 27.11.1999 and order on sentence dated 30.11.1999 both passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge in S.C. No.66/1997 arising out of FIR No.277/92 P.S. Nazafgarh under Section 452/307/34 IPC whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has held the appellants guilty for the offences punishable under Section 452/34 IPC and 307/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo R....
Udesh Kumar Rathi Vs. Uoi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
$~R-116 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: March 10, 2014 + W.P.(C) 3266/2003 UDESH KUMAR RATHI Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.P.Banerjee, Advocate with Ms.Princy Ponnan, Advocate versus UOI & ANR. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Pavan Narang, Advocate with Mr.Lohitaksha Shukla, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The record would reveal that taking cognizance of an offence report the Commandant of the Battalion to which petitioner was attached directed Record of Evidence to be prepared for the reason undisputedly from the SLR issued to the petitioner a shot had been fired within the precincts of the barracks on July 22, 2001 on the intervening night of July 22 and July 23, 2001. The bullet hit the wall near the ceiling.3. The petitioner was working as a Constable with BSF.4. Deputy Commandant R.Siakeng was directed to prepare th...
Roop Lalwani and ors. Vs. Sunita Lalwani and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:06. 03.2014 Pronounced on:10. 03.2014 + LPA5882009, C.M. APPL. 1586/2013 & 1685/2013 ROOP LALWANI AND ORS. ..Petitioners Through: Sh. Dheeraj Malhotra and Sh. Sandeep Mittal, Advocates. Versus SUNITA LALWANI AND ORS. ..Respondents Through: Ms. Karuna Nundy, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. This plaintiffs appeal impugns the judgment and order of a learned Single Judge dated 12.10.2009 by which CS(OS)941/2002, a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (the Act), was dismissed.2. The parties shall be referred to in the course of judgment by the nomenclature assigned to them in the impugned judgment.3. The plaintiffs are the brother and sisters of late M.N. Lalwani, who lived in R-791, New Rajendra Nagar, New Delhi, (the suit property). They alleged that during his lifetime, on 10.01.2002, late Sh. M.N. Lalwani accompanied them to Mumba...
Speciality Food India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:10. 03.2014 + ITA512014 SPECIALITY FOOD INDIA PVT. LTD. Appellant Through: Sh. Ajay Vohra with Ms. Kavita Jha, Advocates. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .Respondent Through: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Jr. 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. Following question of law arises for consideration:Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the given facts of this case was justified in reversing the order of the CIT(A) cancelling the penalty imposed upon the assessee under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act?.2. The assessee was engaged in composite business of manufacture and trading in foodstuff for human and animal consumption. Apparently, it had stopped its manufacturing activities in 2000. During the relevant AY200304, it claimed depreciation of ITA512014 Page 1 `37,95,956/- in respect of its plant and machinery. The depre...
Mohd. Shahid Khan @ Raja Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:10. h March, 2014 + CRL.A. 1345/2011 MOHD. SHAHID KHAN @ RAJA ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Rakhi Dubey, Advocate versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 20 th April, 2011 and order on sentence dated 2nd May, 2011 passed in Sessions Case No.77/2009 in case FIR No.109/2009, PS Kapashera whereby the appellant was held guilty of offence u/s 302 IPC and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay Rs.10,000/- as fine and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for four months.2. Prosecution case emanates from the fact that on 17 th May, 2009, on receipt of a call regarding murder of a male aged about 2025 years at Gali No.8, Kapashera near Govt. Garbage House, near White Flats, New Delhi, PW13, W Constable Sudesh filled the PCR form...
Rajiv Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:21. 02.2014 Date of Decision:10. 03.2014 % + CRL.A. 219 of 2010 RAJIV Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Mohit Mathur, Mr. Shishir Mathur & Mr. Pankaj Verma, Advs. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGEMENT V.K.JAIN, J.On 26.4.1999, on receipt of copy of DD No.25, S.I. Manoj Kumar of Police Station Saraswati Vihar reached F-304, Rashmi Apartment where the statement of the complainant Sushil Agarwal was recorded by him. The complainant told him that on the aforesaid date at about 11:15 a.m., he withdrew Rs.9.55 lakh from Bank of Punjab, Sector-8, Rohini. Out of the aforesaid amount of Rs.9.55 lakh, Rs.65,000/- were paid by him to one Naresh Jain and out of the remaining amount Rs.8.00 lakh were kept by him in a parachute bag of yellow colour which he handed over to his employee Babu Lal. The balance amount of Rs.90,000/- were kept by him in a canvas bag, which he hung on t...
New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Joginder Singh and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:10. h March, 2014 % + MAC.APP. No.1023/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. L.K. Tyagi, Adv. versus JOGINDER SINGH & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: NEMO. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 19.07.2012, whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation as under:Pecuniary Damages (Special damages): a) b) c) d) Medical Expenses Loss of income Special diet expenses Conveyance Charges --------------------------------- Rs.72,849/Rs.64,800/Rs.25,000/Rs.25,000/- Non-pecuniary damages (General damages): e) Pain and suffering, mental shock and trauma --------Total MAC.Appeal No.1023/2012 Rs.1,50,000/Rs. 3,37,649 Page 1 of 5 Ld. Tribunal has also awarded interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till realization of the amount.2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the a...
- ‹ Prev
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- Next ›
- Last »