Delhi Court July 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 31 of about 371 results (0.021 seconds)Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Developmen Vs. M/S Rama Cons ...
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:4. h July, 2014. + FAO(OS) 286/2014 & Caveat No.538/2014 & CMs No.10368/2014 (for condonation of 18 days delay in filing) & 10369/2014 (for condonation of 29 days delay in re-filing) DELHI STATE INDUSTRIAL & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Anusuya Salwan with Mr. Kunal Kohli, Adv. Versus M/S RAMA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY THR ITS PARTNER R.N. GUPTA Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW ..... Respondent RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. This appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) impugns the order dated 12th February, 2014 of the learned Single Judge of this Court of dismissal of objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act being O.M.P. No.774/2013 preferred by the appellant for setting aside of the arbitral award dated 28th May, 2013.2. Though the respondent has filed Caveat No.538/2014 but none appe...
Tag this Judgment!Mitsubishi Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of ...
Court: Delhi
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:04. 07.2014 + ITA3222014 CM APPL.10445/2014 MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. M.S. Syali, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Mayank Nagi, Advocate. versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent 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 VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU (ORAL) 1. This is an appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) impugning the order dated 23.08.2013 (hereinafter referred as the 'impugned order') passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).2. The grievance of the appellant/assessee is that the Assessing Officer, Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) as well as the Disputes Resolution Panel (DRP) has not considered its functional profile while determining its character as that of a trader.3...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co Ltd Through: Deputy Manager Vs. Devnath Thakur ...
Court: Delhi
$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:4. h July, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 508/2014 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD REPRESENTED BY: DEPUTY MANAGER ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Ravinder Singh, Advocate. Versus DEVNATH THAKUR & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM No.9531/2014 (for exemption) Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. MAC.APP. 508/2014 1. Vide the present appeal, the appellant/Insurance Company has assailed the impugned award dated 07.04.2014, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation for a sum of Rs.6,56,646/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization of the amount.2. Mr.Ravinder Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company submits that age of the deceased, Pankaj Thakur was 17 years on the date of the accident, i.e., 11.11.2...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Sharafat and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:4. h July, 2014 % + MAC.APP. 530/2014 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.V.K.Gupta, Advocate. Versus MOHD. SHARAFAT & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM No.10219/2014 (for exemption) Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. MAC.APP. 530/2014 1. The present appeal is preferred against the impugned award dated 15.03.2014, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation for an amount of Rs.16,56,550/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization of the amount.2. Mr.V.K.Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company submits that the deceased, Mohd. Usman was 38 years of age on the date of the accident, i.e., 01.09.2012. The claimants claimed that the deceased was in the busine...
Tag this Judgment!Lily Saini Vs. Nand Kishore Saini
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO4372012 LILY SAINI Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Diwakar Singh, Advocate versus NAND KISHORE SAINI Through: ..... Respondent None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO ORDER0407.2014 : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.(Oral) 1. The Appellant seeks to challenge the judgment dated 14.08.2012 passed by the Family Court, Saket, New Delhi in HMA No.451/2011 whereunder her petition seeking divorce from the Respondent on the ground of cruelty and desertion under Section 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was dismissed.2. The facts relevant for deciding the present appeal are that the Appellant was married to the Respondent as far back as on 25th January, 1987 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The marriage was duly consummated and a son was born to the parties in the same year on 03.11.1987. FAO NO.437/2012 Respondent was of a cruel, adamant and stubborn nature and throughout their matrimonial l...
Tag this Judgment!Amit Kumar Dhankhar Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on June 30 , 2014 Judgment delivered on July 03, 2014 + W.P.(C) 3914/2014 & CM No.7890/2014 AMIT KUMAR DHANKHAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: + ..... Respondents Ms.Sapna Chauhan, Advocate with Mr.Abhijeet Negi, Adv. for R-1 Mr.Parth Goswami, Advocate with Mr.Hemant Phalpher, Adv. for R-2 Mr.Rahul Khurana, Advocate for Mr.Anil Grover, Advocate for R-3 Mr.Pradeep Dewan, Sr. Advocate with Ms.Anupama Dhingra and Mr.Rahul Jain, Advocates for R-4 with Mr.Vinod Tomar, Assistant Secretary for R-4 Mr.Surender Chauhan, Adv. for R-5 with R-5 in person W.P.(C) 3943/2014 & CM No.7935/2014 JOGINDER KUMAR & ORS Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Rahul Mehra, Advocate with Ms.Roma Bhagat, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. Nishant Gautam, Advocate for R1/UOI Mr.Parth Goswami, Advocate with Mr.Hemant Phalpher, Adv. for R-2 Mr.Pradeep Dewan, Sr. Advocate w...
Tag this Judgment!Mukesh Kumar Vs. the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :15. h APRIL, 2014 DECIDED ON :03. d JULY, 2014 + CRL.A.No.211/2011 DAYA RAM Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Ajay Verma, Advocate with Mr.Shiv Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate. versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. AND + CRL.A.No.212/2011 MUKESH KUMAR Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Sudhansu Palo, Advocate with Mr.T.K.Mahapatro, Advocate. versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.The present appeals stand allowed in terms of a detailed common judgment delivered today which is placed in the file of Crl.A.No.263/2011 titled Rajesh Kumar @ Sanjay vs. State of NCT of Delhi. (S.P.GARG) JUDGE JULY03 2014 / TR...
Tag this Judgment!Mukesh Kumar @ Rajesh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :3. d July, 2014 + CRL.A. 49/2011 MUKHTIAR SINGH @ BABLOO ..... Appellant Through : Mr.M.L.Yadav, Advocate. versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. + CRL.A. 439/2011 MUKESH KUMAR @ RAJESH ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Ajay Verma, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Mukhtiar Singh @ Babloo (A-1) and Mukesh Kumar @ Rajesh (A-2) challenge the correctness and legality of a judgment dated 31.07.2010 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.7/07 arising out of FIR No.82/06 registered at Police Station Narcotics Branch by which they were held guilty under Sections 15/25 NDPS Act. By an order dated 06.08.2010, A-1 was sentenced to undergo RI for 15 years with fine ` 2 lacs under Section 15 NDPS Act; RI for ten years with fine `1 lac under Section 25 NDPS Act. A-2 was awarded RI for 10 y...
Tag this Judgment!Abhishek Kumar @ Bal Kishan Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:3. d July, 2014 % W.P.(C) 3266/2014 ABHISHEK KUMAR @ BAL KISHAN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K. Narang, Adv. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Atul Kumar, Adv. for R-2&3. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J C.M.No.6745/2014(exemptions).1. Allowed subject to just exceptions.2. The CM stands disposed of. W.P.(C) No.3266/2014.3. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, i) impugns Rule 69.1 of the Examination Bye-Laws of the respondents no.2&3 Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), on the ground of the same being illegal, unconstitutional and ultra vires the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to the petitioner under the Constitution of India; ii) seeks quashing of the order dated 12th February, 2014 of the respondent CBSE rejecting the request of the petitioner for change of his name in the records of the respondent CBSE; and, i...
Tag this Judgment!Sushil Kumar Gupta Vs. the Chairman Ecpf and Gratuity Trusts and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgement delivered on:03. 07.2014 W.P.(C) 7071/2013 SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA ..... Petitioner versus THE CHAIRMAN ECPF AND GRATUITY TRUSTS & ANR. .... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the petitioner: Mr. R.K. Maheshwari, Advocate For the respondents: Mr. J.K. Singh, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J1 This petition assails the order dated 26.08.2009 passed by the respondents whereby a part of the petitioners terminal benefits have been withheld. There are attendant prayers as well which are, that the respondents be directed to release forthwith pending retiral benefits of the petitioner, such as, employers contribution to CPF, gratuity and insurance with interest @ 12%; and that, the respondents be directed to pay interest @ 12% on the employees share of CPF for the period of 28 months, which is, the period during which the payment was delayed.2. In order to adjudicate upon the grievance...
Tag this Judgment!