Delhi Court April 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 11 of about 432 results (0.023 seconds)Kartar Singh Vs. Ram Anuj Pandey
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.154/2013 28th April, 2014 % KARTAR SINGH Through: ......Appellant Mr. Himanshu Dutt, Adv. VERSUS RAM ANUJ PANDEY Through: ...... Respondent Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This second appeal impugns the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 4.2.2012 and the first appellate court dated 5.12.2012; by which the suit of the respondent-plaintiff for possession was decreed with respect to the suit land being a plot of 40 sq. yds in K.No.11/19, Village Jhuljhuli Extention, New Delhi-73.2. The respondent-plaintiff claimed possession of the suit plot on the ground that he had purchased rights of the same on the basis of general power of attorney registered before the sub-Registrar on 25.2.2002 by the appellant-defendant. Appellant-defendant had also executed a Will dated 25.2.2002 in favour of the respondent-plain...
Tag this Judgment!Sandeep @ Sanjeev Vs. State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:25. 04.2014 Date of Decision:28. 04.2014 + CRL.A. 839/2013 GOVIND @ BHARAT Through: ..... Appellant Mr N.K. Chahar, Adv. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through: + ..... Respondent Mr Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP CRL.A. 956/2013 SANDEEP @ SANJEEV ..... Appellant Through: versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. ..... Respondent Mr Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP Through: + CRL.A. 960/2013 SUNNY ..... Appellant Mr. Pradeep Chaudhary and Mr. Vineet Jain, Advs. Through: versus STATE (GNCT OF DLEHI) ..... Respondent Mr Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN JUDGEMENT V.K. JAIN, J.On 02.10.2009, Head Constable Rajesh Kumar (PW2) was on patrol with other police officials in the area of S.P. Badli at BG Block. When they reached at BG Block, near MCD toilet at about 7.45 pm, they saw a person coming running and shouting pakro pakro. Four boys were running ahead of the aforesaid person. The aforesaid four persons were apprehen...
Tag this Judgment!Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. the P.O., Industrial Tribunal No. Ii a ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on April 28, 2014 + W.P.(C) 1187/1999 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Represented: ..... Petitioner Mr.Sarfaraz Khan, Advocate with Mr.Amanullah, Advocate versus THE P.O., INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No.II AND ANR. Represented: .... Respondents Mr.K.C.Dubey, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.(Oral) 1. The challenge in this writ petition by the Delhi Transport Corporation is to the orders dated January 03, 1998 and June 03, 1998 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, whereby the Industrial Tribunal, vide the first order, has inter alia, held the inquiry conducted by the petitioner, to be not fair and set aside the same. Vide the second order, the Industrial Tribunal held that the petitioner has failed to establish that the respondent No.2 (respondent, in short) had committed a misconduct for which, he was charge sheeted and thereby, dismissed the approval application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Ac...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Mahender Singh and ors. Vs. Shri Dharam Singh
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % RSA No.108/2014 28th April, 2014 SHRI MAHENDER SINGH & ORS. ......Appellants. Through: Mr. Ruchir Batra, Advocate VERSUS SHRI DHARAM SINGH ...... Respondent Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This second appeal is filed under Section 100 CPC impugning the judgment of the first appellate court dated 3.2.2014. The appellate court dismissed the appeal of the plaintiffs/appellants (and who are therefore the appellants in this Court) against the judgment of the trial court dated 30.9.2013. Trial court had dismissed the suit of the appellants/plaintiffs by which the appellants/plaintiffs had sought nullification of the relinquishment deed dated 13.8.1999 executed by Smt. Chhotto whereby she had transferred her 1/6th share in the land comprised in 47 bighas and 7 biswas of land situated in the revenue estate of village Chhawla, New Delhi.2. The only issue which wa...
Tag this Judgment!Shankar Lal Arora Vs. Delhi State Industrial Development Corporation L ...
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
S.C. Jain, Member: 1) The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The facts of the case are that the Complainants father Late Sh. Jindu Ram Arora was running a small scale unit in the name and style of M/s Arora Traders for his and his family livelihood Government of NCR Delhi brought a policy according to which industries based in Delhi were ordered to the relocated from residential areas to newly developed industrial areas and the opposite party proposed to allot plots to industrial units under relocation scheme. 2) The complainants late father vide application No. 29626 applied for plot under relocation scheme with the opposite party and the opposite party allotted a plot bearing No. 52, Pocket D, Sector 4, Bawana Industrial Complex admeasuring 250 Sq.mt@ Rs.4200/- per Sq. Mt. costing Rs.10,50,000/- vide allotment letter dt. 23.10.2000. 3) The complainants late father deposited Rs.2,14,500/- with opposite party agains...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Shakuntala Devi Vs. Central Bank of India
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RSA No.13/2014 28th April, 2014 % SMT. SHAKUNTALA DEVI Through: ..... Appellant Mr. U.K. Sharma, Advocate with Ms. Urmil Sharma, Advocate. Versus CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Ekta Choudhary, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This Second Appeal is filed by the appellant/plaintiff against the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 5.3.2012 and the first appellate court dated 4.10.2013; by which the suit of the appellant/plaintiff for possession and recovery of damages/mesne profits with respect to premises being ground floor and basement of property bearing no.10, Community Centre, First Floor, Lawrance Road, Industrial Area, Delhi was dismissed. The suit was dismissed because the courts below have held that the respondent/defendant had exercised the option in terms of clause 3(d) of the rent agreement Ex.PW1...
Tag this Judgment!M/S V.V. Enterprises Vs. Rungta Irrigation Ltd.
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:25. 04.2014 CO.PET.341/2012 & CO.APPL. 1346/2012 M/S V.V. ENTERPRISES ..... Petitioner versus RUNGTA IRRIGATION LTD. ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Pankaj Aggarwal. For the Respondent : Mr Pramod Ahuja. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 433(e), 434(1)(a) and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) inter alia praying for winding up of the respondent company on the ground that the respondent company has failed and neglected to pay a sum of `2,20,320/- along with interest, due and payable to the petitioner and is thus, unable to pay its debts.2. The respondent had also paid a cheque for the said amount, however, the same was not honoured by the drawee bank and is also stated to have been misplaced during its transmission through banking channels. The respond...
Tag this Judgment!National Highways Authority of India Vs. Som Dutt Builders-ncc-nec (Jv ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: April 25, 2014 + OMP No.40/2011 NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Adv. versus SOM DATT BUILDERS-NCC-NEC (JV) ..... Respondent Through Mr.S.B.Upadhyaya, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Arvind Minocha, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the impugned award dated 29th August, 2010 (received on 6th September, 2010) by filing of the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on various grounds.2. i) Brief facts leading to filing of the present petition is as under The Government of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways launched a National Highways Development Programme, which envisages the following works : - Four/six laning and strengthening of existing National Highways connecting 4 metropolitan cities of Delhi-KolkattaChennai-Mumbai.-. Four/six lani...
Tag this Judgment!Sohan Lal Vs. State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on :01.4.2014. Judgment delivered on :25. 4.2014 CRL.A. 154/2006 SOHAN LAL Through: Appellant Mr. Ashish Kumar, Advocate. Versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through: .Respondent Ms. Fizani Hussain, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 04.02.2006 and 06.02.2006 respectively wherein he has been convicted under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as the PC Act) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.6000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 6 months under Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act; under Section 7 of PC Act he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.4000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 4 months. Both the sentences were to run concurrently. 2 Record shows...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Centrica India Offshore Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax- ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:26. 02.2014 Pronounced on:25. 04.2014 + W.P.(C) No.6807/2012 M/S. CENTRICA INDIA OFFSHORE PVTL. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Venkataraman, Sr. Adv. with Ms. K.G. Rajeshwari & Mr. R. Satish Kumar, Advs. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Jr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The writ petitioner (hereafter called CIOP) is aggrieved by the decision of the Authority for Advance Ruling (the Authority) dated 14.03.2012, by which the latter held that payment by it under the agreement with certain overseas entities is income accruing to overseas entities in view of the existence of a service Permanent Establishment (PE) in India and that tax is liable to be deducted at WP(C) No.6807/2012 Page 1 source under Section 195 of the Indian Incom...
Tag this Judgment!