Delhi Court August 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 19 of about 306 results (0.008 seconds)Ms. Prabha Nandi Vs. Mrs. Gopa Gupta and anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRP No.153/2010 & C.M.No.14772/2010(stay) % AUGUST11 2014 MS. PRABHA NANDI Through: ......Petitioner Mr.Avneesh Garg, Advocate. VERSUS MRS. GOPA GUPTA & ANR. Through: ...... Respondents Mr.Shayam Dutt, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Challenge by means of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the impugned order of the trial court dated 07.5.2010 which has dismissed the amendment application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff for amendment of the plaint.2. Ordinarily, the courts would not refuse amendments, however, the court below has found, and to which aspect I would also agree, that the effect of seeking the amendments as prayed for will result in the plaintiff completely changing the nature of the suit as also the reliefs which are claimed. In addition to the observations of the trial court, I find that the petitioner/plain...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Soma Devi JaIn Vs. Smt. Anita Pawar and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC REV No.369/2013 % SMT. SOMA DEVI JAIN Through:11. h August, 2014 ......Petitioner Mr. Manish Vashisht, Advocate. VERSUS SMT. ANITA PAWAR & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. Ravi Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Mukhija, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This revision petition is filed under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the petitioner/landlord impugning the judgment dated 31.8.2013 by which the Additional Rent Controller has granted leave to defend. The petitioner/landlord seeks eviction of the respondents/tenants from a shop in the ground floor of property bearing no.G-14, Ground Floor, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi as shown in yellow colour in the site plan as annexed alongwith the eviction petition. The tenanted premises are in an area of approximately 927 sq feet.2. Admittedly...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Dal Chand Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:11. h August, 2014 % + LPA No.227/2014 & CM No.4515/2014 (for interim directions). SMT RAMWATI & ORS. Through: ..... Appellants Mr. S. S. Panwar with Mr. Nivedita Panwar, Advs. Versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ...Respondents Through: Mr. B. Mahapatra, Adv. AND + LPA No.228/2014 & CM No.4529/2014 (for filing additional documents) and CM No.4530/2014 (for stay). SHRI DAL CHAND Through: ..... Appellant Mr. S. S. Panwar with Mr. Nivedita Panwar, Advs. Versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ...Respondents Through: Mr. B. Mahapatra, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 These intra-court appeals impugn the common order dated 22nd November, 2013 of the learned Single Judge of dismissal of W.P.(C) No.7311/2013 & W.P.(C) No.7310/2013 filed by the appellants respectively on account of inordinate delay and laches.2. The land of the appellant in LPA No.228/2014 was acquired vide La...
Tag this Judgment!Cellnext Solutions Limited and ors. Vs. ............
Court: Delhi
$~18 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CO.PET. 305/2014 IN THE MATTER OF: CELLNEXT SOLUTIONS L IM ITED & ORS . Through: .... PETITIONERS Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Atma Sah, and Assistant Registrar of Companies for the Regional Director. Mr. Rajiv Behl Advocate for the Official Liquidator. CORA M: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER1108.2014 % SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) 1. This second motion joint Petition has been filed under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) seeking Amalgamation sanction (Scheme) to of the Scheme Cellnext of Solutions Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferor Company No.1) and Gingersoft Media Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferor Company No.2), ================================================== CO.PET. 305 /2014 1 and Packet Shaper Technologies Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferor Company No.3) with ValueFirst (hereinafter Digital referred to Medial as Private Transfe...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Through the Controller of Stores No Vs. Manoj Cable Com ...
Court: Delhi
$~14 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. No.415/2013 Judgement Reserved on:22. d July, 2014 % Judgement pronounced on:11. h August, 2014 UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE CONTROLLER OF STORES NORTHERN RAILWAY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Nitish Gupta, proxy counsel for Mr.Ravi Prakash, Adv. versus MANOJ CABLE COMPANY PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Amit Singh Narag, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT1 Vide this petition a challenge has been placed to an award dated 30.11.2012 whereby while rejecting the claim of the petitioner, learned arbitrator has allowed the claim of the respondent and held that the act of the petitioner by not allowing the price variation beyond March, 2009 was contrary to the terms of the contract and therefore contractually and legally not justified and issued directions to Northern Railway, COSs office to suitably settle the claim of the respondent.2. The admitted brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had floated a ten...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Shiv Kumar Kaushik Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:11. 08.2014 + W.P.(C) 7107/2013 SH. SHIV KUMAR KAUSHIK ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. M.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate. Versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Ms. Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel (Civil), GNCTD with Ms. Sana Ansari, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The writ petitioner challenges an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), dated 14.02.2013 in O.A. No.3983/2011. The CAT had found that, contrary to the petitioners arguments, his year of employment, for the purposes of financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP) was 1988, and that the rejection of his representations for upgradation were justified, since he had not yet completed the requisite number of years (twenty-four) in service.2. In 1982-83, the Delhi Administration notified 654 vacancies for Trained Grad...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Lalit Rai @ Lalak Rai and ors. Vs. Kamla Rani
Court: Delhi
$~R-23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA1732005 Decided on 11th August, 2014 RAM LALIT RAI @ LALAK RAI & ORS. Through ..... Appellants Mr. Saurabh Shrama, Adv. versus KAMLA RANI ..... Respondent Through None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.(ORAL) 1. Respondent filed a suit for partition and permanent injunction against the appellants. Vide judgment and decree dated 11.02.2005, which is impugned in this appeal, trial court has passed a decree of declaration to the effect that respondent is daughter of Late Sh. Sadhu Ram and was entitled to her share in the suit property, that is, house bearing No.175, West Azad Nagar, Gali No.17, Krishna Nagar Shahdara, (S) Zone Estate, Delhi 110093 (hereinafter referred to as the suit property). A preliminary decree of partition has also been passed. Appellants have also been restrained from alienating or creating third party interest in the suit property till the final decree of partition is passed.2. Respondent alle...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Bank of Commerce Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:11. 08.2014 W.P.(C) 2594/2013, CM49182013 & CM159702013 ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE ..Petitioner versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Rajat Navet, Ms Sanya Talwar and Mr Rohan Yadav. For the Respondent : Mr N.P.Sahni and Mr Nitin Gulati. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition is directed against the re-assessment order dated 28.03.2013 passed by the Assessing Officer in re-assessment proceedings pursuant to the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) dated 29.03.2012 pertaining to the assessment year 2005-06. The writ petition also seeks the quashing of the entire re-assessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the said Act as being without jurisdiction.2. It is an admitted position that t...
Tag this Judgment!Omniglobe Information Tech India Pvt Ltd Vs. Cit
Court: Delhi
$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:11. h August, 2014 + INCOME TAX APPEAL2572012 OMNIGLOBE INFORMATION TECH INDIA PVT LTD ..... Appellant Through Mr. Ajay Vohra and Ms. Kavita Jha, Advocates. versus CIT Through Counsel. ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) This appeal by the assessee pertains to assessment year 2005-06 and was admitted for hearing vide order dated 19 th October, 2012, on the following substantial question of law:Did the Tribunal fall into error in holding that the assessee had setup its business w.e.f. 1.6.2004 and not w.e.f. 1.4.2004, as held in the impugned order. 2. The appellant-assessee was incorporated on 19th March, 2004, as a subsidiary of one M/s Omniglobe International, USA, as a business process service provider. The appellant-assessee had claimed deduction under section 10B, of the Income Tax Act (Act, for short),...
Tag this Judgment!Yogesh Pandey Vs. Rohini Court Bar Asso. and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8032/2012 AND C.M. APPL. 20043/2012 YOGESH PANDEY Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Arun Nischal, Advocate. versus ROHINI COURT BAR ASSO. AND ORS. Through: None. .....Respondents Date of Decision :08th August, 2014 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present writ petition has been filed seeking setting aside of election for the post of Library In-charge. The petitioner has also prayed for reelection for the post of Library In-charge or in the alternative constitution of a Committee to investigate the fraud allegedly played in the election process by respondent No.1 in connivance with respondent No.2.2. After a perusal of the paper-book, this Court is of the view that this writ petition not only raises disputed questions of fact for which evidence would have to be led but it also seeks relief of setting aside the election result, which relief in writ proceedings should normally not be granted. This Cour...
Tag this Judgment!