Delhi Court April 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.
D.T.C. Vs. Amarjeet Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2014
$-R-4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date: April 22, 2014 + W.P.(C) 400/2003 D.T.C. Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Adesh Kumar Gill, Advocate. versus AMARJEET SINGH & ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr.Atul T.N., Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) 1. The present writ petition is filed seeking to quash the impugned order dated 18.03.2002 passed by the Industrial Tribunal dismissing the petition of the petitioner under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 by which petition the petitioner sought approval for its directions for removal of the respondent from service.2. The basic facts which lead to filing of the present petition are that the respondent was employed as a Conductor by the petitioner. On 04.05.1989 the respondent was performing his duty as a Conductor on the route of New Delhi-Bulandshahr. Members of the Ticket Checking Staff of the petitioner inspected the Bus. It was found that two passengers were travelling in the...
Arvind Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2014
$~5. *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRIMINAL APPEAL No.389/2011 Date of decision:22. d April, 2014 ARVIND KUMAR ..... Appellant Through Mr. Mohan Tyagi & Ms. Ruchi Kapur, Advocates. Versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) Arvind Kumar has challenged his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short) for having committed murder of Kusheshwar on 29th April, 2006 by a fire arm injury. The impugned judgment dated 12th January, 2011, however, acquits the appellant under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 on the ground of want of sanction. State has not preferred any appeal against the said acquittal. By order on sentence dated 27 th January, 2011, the appellant has been sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the appellant has to undergo Simple Imprisonme...
M/S Canbank Factors Ltd Vs. Rohit Diwan and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2014
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 889/2013 % Judgment dated 22.04.2014 M/S CANBANK FACTORS LTD THROUGH: ..Plaintiff Mr. P.k. Mittak, Advocate Versus ROHIT DIWAN & ANR THROUGH: ..Defendants CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs. 84,17,169.73. Summons in the suit were issued on 20.05.2013. Defendants were served on 30.07.2013. Despite service and time having being granted written statement was not filed by the defendant, consequently right of defendants to file written statement was closed on 28.02.2014. The plaintiff has filed affidavit of Mr. Santosh Kumar (PW1), by way of evidence. The affidavit by way of evidence of PW1 has been exhibited as Ex. PW1/A.2. PW1 has deposed that he holds general power of attorney from the plaintiff company in his favour to sign and file the present plaint. The power of attorney has been exhibited as EX. PW-1/1.3. PW1has also deposed that that he ha...
Ravi Kumar Vs. the Official Liquidator and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2014
$~ *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:22. d April, 2014 + CO.APP. 73/2013 RAVI KUMAR Through ..... Appellant Mr. R.D. Makheeja, Advocate. versus THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR & ANR. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Rajiv Bahl, Advocate for Official Liquidator. Mr. Navinder Nath Gautam and Ms. Anjali Rajput, Advocates for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL SANJIV KHANNA, J.Ravi Kumar, Director of M/s Presidium Breweries Pvt. Ltd. (Company, for short) has filed the present intra Court appeal impugning orders dated 15th May, 2013 and 29th August, 2013 passed in Company Petition No.306/2012 titled Paramvir Singh Vs. Presidium Breweries Pvt. Ltd.2. Order dated 15th May, 2013 records that earlier on 27th February, 2013, the Managing Director of the company had appeared in person and was directed to file an affidavit stating and mentioning movable and immovable assets and enclosing therewith balance sheets, profit and loss accounts and s...
Ford Motor Company and anr. Vs. Mrs. C.R.Borman and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2014
$~50. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1710/2005 % Judgment dated 22.04.2014 FORD MOTOR COMPANY & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through : Mr.Pravin Anand, Mr.Shrawan Chopra and Mr.Vibhav Mittal, Advs. versus MRS. C.R.BORMAN & ANR. B+ ..... Defendants Through : Mr.Ajay Sahni, Ms.Kanika Bajaj, Ms.Vasudha Bajaj, Mr.Pallav Palit and Mr.Gautam Banerjee, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Plaintiffs have filed the present suit for permanent injunction, restraining infringement of trademarks, passing off, rendition of accounts of profits, damages, delivery up, etc.2. As per the plaint, which is duly supported by an affidavit of Mr.Mark S. Sparschu, plaintiff no.1, Ford Motor Company, is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Delaware, United States of America and having its principal place of business at Michigan, United States of America. In the plaint, the plaintiffs have given in detail the background of the plaintiffs business a...
Shonkh Technologies International Ltd. and anr. Vs. Government of Nct ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgement reserved on: % + 16.01.2014 Judgement delivered on:21. 04.2014 O.M.P. 1139/2013 & I.A. No.21266/2013 SHONKH TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL LTD. & ANR. ..... Petitioner Through: Dr. A.M.Singhvi, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate along with M/s Chinmay Sharma, Meghna Mishra, Simran Brar,Rohan Sharma, Akhil Sahai, Mohit Mudgal & Rubin Klar, Advocates versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurab Banerjee, ASG along with Mr. Amiet Andlay, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGEMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The petitioner No.1 entered into a concession agreement with the respondent GNCTD for undertaking the service of providing Vehicle Registration Certificates (VRC) in all the Motor Licensing Offices (MLO) offices and at the Headquarter Office of the respondent at Under Hill Road, Delhi. Petitioner No.2 was engaged by petitioner No.1 as a consortium partner for execution of the said VRC project...
Lufthansa German Airlines Vs. Globe Ground India Employees Union and a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on April 15, 2014 Judgment Delivered on April 21, 2014 + W.P.(C) 1255/2014 LUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINES Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.C.Mukhopadhyay, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Alok Bhasin, Ms.Rashmi Gogoi, Advocates versus GLOBE GROUND INDIA EMPLOYEES UNION AND ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Raj Kr.Sherawat with Mr.Sushil Kumar, Advocate for R1 Mr.Virender Mehta, Advocate for R2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.1. The challenge in this writ petition is to the order passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (Tribunal, in short) dated December 12, 2013 in I.D. No.335/2011 on an application moved by the respondent No.1 under Section 18 (3)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for impleading Lufthansa German Airlines, the petitioner as a party to the dispute.2. The brief facts are, that the respondent No.2 namely M/s. Globe Ground India Pvt. Ltd. (GGI, in short) was incorporated in...
Commissioner of Income Tax-iv Vs. M/S. Dandm Components Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :21. 03.2014 Pronounced on :21. 04.2014 + + ITA5612012 ITA5662012, C.M. No.16325/2012 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV ..Appellant Through: Sh. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel and Sh. Nitin Gulati, Advocate. Versus M/S. D&M COMPONENTS LTD. ..Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. These two appeals by the Revenue question a common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) by which the assessees appeal in respect of its claim for short term capital gain was allowed and the Revenues appeal in respect of the claim for long term capital gain was dismissed. The question of law which arises for consideration is whether the amounts claimed as long term and short term capital gains by the assessee could have been treated as such by the ITAT in its impugned order.2. During the year under consideration (AY200607) the assessee was engaged in ...
M/S. Crew B.O.S. Products Limited Vs. Dbs Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CO.APP. 21/2014 and CM No.6667/2014 M/S. CREW B.O.S. PRODUCTS LIMITED ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Shiv Shankar Banerjee, Advocate. versus DBS BANK ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI ORDER (ORAL) : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 14.03.2014 passed by the learned Company Judge in Company Petition No.52/2013 whereby the said Company Petition was admitted to hearing and a direction was issued for publication of the advertisement of the said petition in the Statesman (English Edition) and Jansatta (Hindi Edition) for 14.07.2014. It was, however, directed that the said order shall not be given effect to for a period of two weeks from the date thereof in order to enable the Appellant to clear the outstanding dues or arrive at an amicable settlement.2. We note at the outset that notice of the petition was directed to be issued to the Respond...
Directorate of Small Savings and Lotteries Govt of Vs. Nirmal Lotterie ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: April 21, 2014 + RFA(OS) 58/2012 & CM No.9723/2012 DIRECTORATE OF SMALL SAVINGS AND LOTTERIES GOVT OF NCT DELHI ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Kumar Khanna, ASG instructed by Mr.D.Rajeswar Rao, Mr.Mohit Nagar and Ms.Nithya, Advocates versus NIRMAL LOTTERIES & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Amit P.Despande, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The appellant had invoked a bank guarantee in sum of `53,74,667/- which had been furnished by the respondents banker at the instance of the respondent; being required to do so as a condition of the contract under which the respondent was acting as the stockist for a weekly lottery scheme launched by the appellant. While invoking the bank guarantee the appellant had quantified the demand as under:i) ii) iii) iv) v) Difference on royalty upto 33rd Draw Interest on dues of royalty Amount of dishonou...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »