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

Try free for 7 days Semantic AI Search

Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.

Mar 28 2014

Mon Mohan Kohli (The Next Friend and Guardian) Vs. Natasha Kohli and o ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-28-2014

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : March 03, 2014 Judgment Pronounced on : March 28, 2014 + EFA (OS) 04/2014 MON MOHAN KOHLI (THR NEXT FRIEND AND GUARDIAN) .....Appellant Represented by: Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Ashish Dholakia, Mr.Abhimanyu Mahajan, Mr.Krishna Kumar and Mr.Milan Deep, Advocates versus NATASHA KOHLI & ORS .....Respondents Represented by: Mr.Jayant Mehta, Advocate with Ms.Anu Bagai and Mr.Bhuvan Mishra, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT NATH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Objection taken in appeal is to the order dated November 07, 2013 disposing of Execution Petition No.30/2007 filed by the first respondent Natasha Kohli. A consent decree dated January 03, 1996 passed in CS (OS) No.824/1993 has been executed by directing judgment debtor No.2 Sh.Mon Mohan Singh Kohli to transfer 600 shares held by him in judgment debtor No.1 M/s.JEY KAY Pvt. Ltd. in favour of a company named M/...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 28 2014

Sh.P.P.Shrivastav Vs. Shree Adya Katyayani Shaktipeeth (Mandir) Trust ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-28-2014

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: March 21, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: March 28, 2014 + RFA(OS) 62/2014 SH S B SHARMA Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Gaurav Mitra and Mr.Gaurav Mahajan, Advocates Versus SHREE ADYA KATYAYANI SHAKTIPEETH ( MANDIR) TRUST & ORS ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Ashok Chhabra, Advocate + RFA(OS) 63/2014 DR R C JAIN (DECEASED) THR ITS LR SHRI NIRMAL JAIN ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Gaurav Mitra and Mr.Gaurav Mahajan, Advocates Versus SHREE ADYA KATYAYANI SHAKTIPEETH (MANDIR) TRUST & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Ashok Chhabra, Advocate + RFA(OS) 64/2014 SH P P SHRIVASTAV Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Gaurav Mitra and Mr.Gaurav Mahajan, Advocates Versus SH...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 28 2014

M/S. Kbb Nuts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Value Added Tax

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-28-2014

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. 03.2014 Pronounced on:28. 03.2014 + ST. APPL. 5/2014 M/S. KBB NUTS PVT. LTD. ..Appellant Through: Sh. Rajesh Jain with Sh. P.C. Aggarwal and Sh. Virag Tiwari, Advocates. Versus COMMISSIONER OF VALUE ADDED TAX ..Respondent Through: Sh. Raj. K. Batra, Advocate. 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 the order of the learned Member of the Appellate Tribunal, VAT Delhi dated 27.1.2014. The question of law for determination is whether Roasted Dry Fruits come under entry No.81 of Schedule III of DVAT Act, 2004.2. The appellant is a registered dealer which trades in various commodities. It contended that roasted dry fruits sold by it had to be classified under entry No.81 of Schedule III of Delhi Value Added Tax Act 2004 (DVAT) and preferred an application for such determination under Section 84. The revenue took the position that there is ...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 28 2014

Laxman Singh and ors Vs. Urmila Devi and ors

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-28-2014

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :08. 11.2013 Decided on :28. 03.2014 + CS(OS) 3275/2012 ..... Plaintiff LAXMAN SINGH & ORS Through Mr.Saurabh Tiwari, Advocate versus URMILA DEVI & ORS Through .... Defendants Mr. Raman Gandhi, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. The plaintiffs have filed the present suit for possession, damages and mesne profits. Plaintiff No.2 is the mother and plaintiff No.1 is her son. They claim to be the absolute owners of property being plot No.323/1-A, Block-D (Old No.229/1-A), Sangam Vihar, New Delhi-110062 measuring 200 sq.yards. The said suit property was purchased by plaintiff No.1 along with his late brother Bhagat Ram whereby each was owner of 100 square yards respectively. It is stated that the seller executed a general power of attorney dated 12.04.1985, an agreement to sell dated 12.04.1985 and a receipt for consideration of `40,000/-. The property is said to be built up having eight rooms, a store room...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 28 2014

Oriental Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Sh Dharam Pal and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-28-2014

$~38, 39, 50, 52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h March, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 270/2014 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Pankaj Seth, Advocate. Versus SH KISHAN LAL @ KISHORI LAL & ORS. Represented by: None. ..... Respondents AND + MAC.APP. 271/2014 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Pankaj Seth, Advocate. Versus SH NARENDER LAL & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents None. AND + MAC.APP. 282/2014 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Pankaj Seth, Advocate. Versus SH DILSHAD & ORS. Represented by: MAC.APP. Nos.270, 271, 282 & 284/2014 ..... Respondents AND + MAC.APP. 284/2014 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Pankaj Seth, Advocate. Versus SH DHARAM PAL & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. These appeals have been preferred against the impugned award dated 21.12.2013, whereby...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 28 2014

Oriental Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Sh Kishan Lal @ Kishori Lal and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-28-2014

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 28 2014

Ram Singh Baliyan Vs. State and anr

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-28-2014

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: March 28, 2014 + CRL.M.C. 472/2014 RAM SINGH BALIYAN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil K. Mittal with Mr. Kshitij Mittal, Mr. Anshul Mittal, Ms. Vaishali Mittal, Advocates versus STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Jasbir Kaur, APP. Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate for R-2. I.O. SI Madhurendra Kumar, DIU/South Distt., Malviya Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.1. This is a petition under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the petitioner/complainant of FIR No.548/2013, u/s 307/308/34/120-B of IPC, P.S. Malviya Nagar wherein prayer is made for cancellation of bail granted to the respondent No.2 by this Court vide order dated 21.01.2014.2. The allegations against the respondent No.2/accused are that on 24.10.2013 he had mercilessly beaten the petitioner/complainant along with other accused persons whereupon the petitioner was taken to AIIMS Trauma Centre by PCR. Thereupon, DD No.107B dated ...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 28 2014

Oriental Insurance Co Ltd Vs. Asha Devi and ors

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-28-2014

$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:28. h March, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 927/2011 ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. A.K. Soni, Adv. Versus ASHA DEVI & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. I.C. Mishra, Adv. for R1 to R5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Vide the present appeal, the appellant has assailed the award dated 29.06.2011, whereby Ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.40,76,760/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till realization of the amount.2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle was not proved, despite the Ld. Tribunal has held that the driver of the offending vehicle was negligent in committing the accident.3. He submits that the driver of the offending vehicle appeared before the Ld. Tribunal and was examined as R2W1, who stated th...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 28 2014

Oriental Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Sh Dilshad and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-28-2014

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 28 2014

Smt. Krishna Goel Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Mar-28-2014

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.322/2012 28th March, 2014 % SMT. KRISHNA GOEL ....Appellant Through: None. VERSUS STATE ...... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. No one appeared for the appellant on 12.4.2013. It was noted that the matter is taken up for the third time but counsel for the appellant did not appear and only a request for pass over was made by the proxy counsel. This matter was adjourned for 14.5.2013 subject to costs of Rs.3,000/-with Delhi Legal Services Authority. Thereafter, the matter could not be listed on the date fixed i.e 14.5.2013 as costs were not deposited. The matter is therefore listed today on an office note. Besides the fact that no one appears for the appellant and even the costs of Rs.3,000/- have not been deposited.2. By the impugned judgment, the petition filed by the appellant under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

‹ Prev
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Next ›
Last »

Delhi Court March 2014 Judgments

Open an 18-section brief on any judgment

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.