Delhi Court May 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.
Anup Sharma and ors. Vs. Nagendra Prasad Yadav
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: May 21, 2014 + CS(OS) No.773/2013 ANUP SHARMA & ORS Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr.Vinay Kr. Garg, Adv. with Mr.Neeraj Kr. Sharma & Mr.Amit Srivastva, Advs. versus NAGENDRA PRASAD YADAV ..... Defendant Through Defendant already ex parte. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiffs for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 30th August, 2012 and permanent injunction against the defendant.2. The summons in the suit was issued to the defendant on 29th April, 2013. Defendant entered appearance on 25th October, 2013, however, thereafter neither did the defendant appear in the matter nor did he file the written statement. Accordingly, he was proceeded ex parte vide order dated 15th April, 2014 and the plaintiffs were directed to lead evidence by filing affidavits of all the witnesses.3. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the plaintiffs and def...
Controls and Switchgear Contactors Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:21. 05.2014 W.P.(C) 2845/2014 & CM APPL. 5898/2014 CONTROLS & SWITCHGEAR CONTACTORS LIMITED ..... Petitioner versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE31) NEW DELHI ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Piyush Kaushik. For the Respondent: Mr N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr Nitin Gulati, Jr Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J (ORAL) 1. This is a petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, whereby the petitioner impugns an order dated 31.10.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), rejecting the petitioners application under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), for rectification of the order dated 20.04.2012 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.1642/Del/2010. By the said order dated 20...
Commissioner of Income Tax-ix Vs. High Tech Engineers
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:21. 05.2014 ITA2312014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IX ..... Appellant versus HIGH TECH ENGINEERS ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr Rohit Madan, Mr P. Roy Choudhary and Mr Akash Vajpai. For the Respondent: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J (OPEN COURT) 1. The Revenue claims to be aggrieved by the impugned order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), whereby the order of the CIT(Appeals), rendered in favour of the assessee was affirmed.2. The assessees original return for AY199899 was accepted, it had reported an income of `4,04,930/-. The AO sought to re-assess the income by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), and framed a fresh assessment on 29.03.2004. In this case, the AO disallowed a sum of `7,40,04,922/- originally claimed by the assessee under Section 80HHC of...
Pt. Gopal Prasad Shastri and anr. Vs. Subhash Chand Verma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.438/2012 & CM No.18197/2012 (Stay) 21st May, 2014 % PT. GOPAL PRASAD SHASTRI & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Bheem Sharma & Mr. R.S. Sharma, Advocates Versus SUBHASH CHAND VERMA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sindhu Sinha, Advocate for R-1 & 2 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 Order 43 (1)(d) CPC against the impugned order of the Court below dated 29th August, 2012 by which the Court below has dismissed the application filed by the appellants-defendant nos. 1 and 2 under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. The application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC was filed for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 20th November, 2009 for a sum of approximately Rs. 2,32,000 along with interest. The subject suit was filed on account of the claim of respondent nos. 1 and 2-plaintiffs of their being maliciously prosecuted by the appell...
Dda Vs. Sheri Roshan Lal Chopra and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % RSA232009 21st May, 2014 DDA Through: ......Appellant Mr. Rajiv Bansal, Ms. Arpita and Mr. Ray Chaudhary, Advocates. VERSUS SHERI ROSHAN LAL CHOPRA & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. R.K.Saini, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This second appeal is filed under Section 100 CPC, 1908 by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA)/appellant/defendant impugning the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 1.2.2002 and the first appellate court dated 29.8.2008; by which the appellant has been directed to mutate the suit property bearing Plot no.14, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase II, New Delhi in the name of the respondent-plaintiff without claiming the 50% unearned increase.2. The facts of the case are that the suit property was leased out by the appellant to one M/s Asia Press. Against M/s Asia Press, there was a money decree and ...
Jawahar Singh Tomar Vs. Director of Education and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-2014
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:21. 05.2014 W.P.(C) 1973/2012 and CM No.4253/2012 (interim directions) JAWAHAR SINGH TOMAR ..... PETITIONER VERSUS DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & ANR. ..... RESPONDENTS ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE: For the Petitioner : Ms. Indrani Ghosh, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani and Ms. Bandana Shukla, Advocates CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J1 This writ petition involves an issue which falls within a narrow compass. The petitioner, who in the normal course, retired from service on 30.06.2010 sought re-employment under notification dated 29.01.2007 which on the face of it applied to teachers. The matter was agitated in this court, whereupon the court, in the case of Sushma Nayar Vs. Managing Committee, Delhi Public School and Ors., 2009 (VII) AD Delhi 246 decided the issue in favour of those Vice Principals / Principals, who were claiming parity with the teachers, for the purpose of re...
Ved Kumari Dhawan Vs. M/S. Parsvnath Developers Ltd.
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on: May-21-2014
S.A. Siddiqui, Member (Judicial): 1. Complainant MRs.Ved Kumari Dhawan filed this complaint against the OP M/s Parsvnath Developers under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (hereinafter called the Act) for refund of Rs.28,38,737/- alongwith interest and compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- and cost of litigation. 2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant booked a flat on 30.04.2006 in upcoming residential project of the OP in the name and style of œParsavnath Privilege? at Greater Noida-UP, and made an initial payment of Rs.10 Lac vide cheque No. 817414 dt. 30.04.2006 drawn on ICICI Bank, Noida. She further made payment of Rs.3,21,687.50/- through cheque No. 504280 dt. 20.03.2007, Rs.5,76,905/- through cheque No. 504292 dt. 21.11.2007, Rs.4,70072.50/- through cheque No. 227928 dt. 27.05.2008 and Rs.4,70,072/- through cheque No. 724683 dt. 08.10.2008 totalling to Rs.28,38,737/- (Rs.Twenty Eight Lakh Thirty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty Seven Only) (payment receipt...
Shyam Narayan Chouksey Vs. Bhopal Municipal Corporation Sadar Manzil, ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: May-21-2014
Dalip Singh, Judicial Member: 1. M.A. No. 238/2014 has been filed by the Municipal Corporation, Bhopal with the prayer to bring onto record the documents annexed as Annexure 1/A 1 Original Application No. 16/2014 affidavit of the Municipal Commissioner, Annexure 1A/2 the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Writ Petition No. 6145/2002 passed on 11th April, 2014 and accompanying petition as well as the order dated 8th May, 2014 in the aforesaid writ petition. 2. The Applicant as well as the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents are unanimous in their submission that the entire matter pertains to the removal of encroachments from the Siddique Hasan Talab in the city of Bhopal resulting in pollution of the lake as well as areas around it and the same is also under active consideration and adjudication by the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh and directions in the above noted writ petition are being issued regularly and the case is also being monitore...
Asif Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-20-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on :15.05.2014. Judgment delivered on :20.05.2014. CRL.A. 238/2006 ASIF Through versus ..... Appellant Mr.Azhar Qayum, Adv. STATE Through + ..... Respondent Mr. Navin K. Jha, APP CRL.A. 240/2006 NADEEM Through versus ..... Appellant Mr. M.L. Yadav, Adv. STATE Through ..... Respondent Mr. Navin K. Jha, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 These are two appeals directed against the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 03.04.2006 & 07.04.2006 respectively wherein appellant Asif and appellant Nadeem have been convicted under Section 395 read with Section 397 of the IPC besides a separate conviction under Section 25 of the Arms Act. Accused Asif has been additionally convicted under Section 412 of the IPC as well. Each of the appellants has been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 7 years for the offence under Section 395 read with Section 397 of the IPC besides a fine of Rs.2,000/- and...
Ms Anita Kaur Vs. Universal Weather and Aviation India Private Limit
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-20-2014
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:20. h May, 2014 % + FAO(OS) 61/2014 MS ANITA KAUR Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Arun K. Sinha with Mr. Sumit Sinha, Advs. Versus UNIVERSAL WEATHER AND AVIATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ajit Warrier with Mr. Tanuj Bhushan, Adv. for R-1. Ms. Haripriya Padmanabhan with Mr. Vikramaditya, Adv. for R-2. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. The appeal impugns the order dated 16th December, 2013 of the learned Single Judge of this Court (exercising ordinary original civil jurisdiction in CS(OS) No.599/2012 filed by the appellant) allowing the application being IA No.10718/2013 of the defendant / respondent no.2 Universal Weather and Aviation Inc. Texas, USA under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908 and deleting the defendant / respondent no.2 from the array of defendants in the suit, holding the defendant / respondent no.2 to be neith...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »