Delhi Court August 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 27 of about 306 results (0.018 seconds)imran Khan Vs. Nia
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 31, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: August 05, 2014 % + CRL.A. 781/2013 SYED MAQBOOL Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mehmod Pracha, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Kalra, Advocate versus N.I.A. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG instructed by Mr.Amit Sharma, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs.Shilpa Singh, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs. Kanchan, P.P. of NIA, Mr.Vikas Vaibhav, CIO, NIA, Mr.Amod Kumar, IO, NIA and Mr.Som Prakash, Advocate CRL.A. 782/2013 IMRAN KHAN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mehmod Pracha, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Kalra, Advocate versus N.I.A. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG instructed by Mr.Amit Sharma, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs.Shilpa Singh, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs. Kanchan, P.P. of NIA, Mr.Vikas Vaibhav, CIO, NIA, Mr.Amod Kumar, IO, NIA and Mr.Som Prakash, Advocate CRL.A. 1554/2013 WASIM AKRAM MALIK CRL.A.No.781/2013 & conn.matters ..... Appellant Page 1 of 25 Represented by: Mr.Meh...
Tag this Judgment!Wasim Akram Malik Vs. National Investigating Agency
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 31, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: August 05, 2014 % + CRL.A. 781/2013 SYED MAQBOOL Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mehmod Pracha, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Kalra, Advocate versus N.I.A. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG instructed by Mr.Amit Sharma, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs.Shilpa Singh, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs. Kanchan, P.P. of NIA, Mr.Vikas Vaibhav, CIO, NIA, Mr.Amod Kumar, IO, NIA and Mr.Som Prakash, Advocate CRL.A. 782/2013 IMRAN KHAN Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Mehmod Pracha, Advocate with Mr.Ajay Kalra, Advocate versus N.I.A. Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG instructed by Mr.Amit Sharma, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs.Shilpa Singh, Special P.P. of NIA, Mrs. Kanchan, P.P. of NIA, Mr.Vikas Vaibhav, CIO, NIA, Mr.Amod Kumar, IO, NIA and Mr.Som Prakash, Advocate CRL.A. 1554/2013 WASIM AKRAM MALIK CRL.A.No.781/2013 & conn.matters ..... Appellant Page 1 of 25 Represented by: Mr.Meh...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and anr. Vs. B.P.Gairola and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision:04. 08.2014 % W.P.(C.) No.6708/2013 UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. R.V. Sinha, Mr. R.N. Singh and Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocates versus B.P. GAIROLA & ORS Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Rajesh Katyal, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioner/Union of India (UOI) claims to be aggrieved by an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT/ Tribunal) dated 14.05.2013 in O.A. No.2853/2012. The Tribunal had directed retrospective promotion of the first respondent/applicant with effect from the date the vacancy occurred in the cadre of Area Organiser for the year 2011-12.2. The undisputed facts are that the respondent employee initially joined the UOI as Circle Organiser in Group B gazetted executive cadre post on 19.11.1985. He was subsequently promoted on the basis of seniority to the rank of Joint Area Organiser with...
Tag this Judgment!Staff Selection Commission Through Its Chairman Vs. Parveen and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~19 & 23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELH % + DECIDED ON:04. 08.2014 W.P.(C) 4832/2014 and CM Nos. 9649-50/2014 STAFF SELECTION CHAIRMAN COMMISSION THROUGH ITS .... Petitioner versus PARVEEN AND ORS ..... Respondents And + W.P.(C) 4848/2014 and CM No.9667-68/2014 STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN ..... Petitioner versus SUDEEP AND ORS ..... Respondent Through: Mr S.M. Arif, Adv. for the petitioners. Ms Zubeda Begum, Advocate for respondent No.3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by an order of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 10.10.2013. The CAT by the said order set aside the final results of the recruitment process, for the post of Sub-Inspector (Executive) in Delhi Police, 2012. The CAT further directed to the authorities to draw the final results, strictly on W.P.(C) Nos. 4832 and 4848/2014 Page 1 the basis of aggregate marks ...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Satpal Vs. Shri Bharat Prakash Gupta
Court: Delhi
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 222/2012 & CM nos. 9000/2012, 16039/2013 % AUGUST4 2014 SHRI SATPAL ..... Petitioner Through Mr. R.P. Vats, Advocate versus SHRI BHARAT PRAKASH GUPTA ..... Respondent Through Respondent in person CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this petition, under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the petitioner/tenant impugns the judgment of the Additional Rent Controller dated 29.2.2012 which has dismissed the application for leave to defend and has granted eviction with respect to the tenanted shop on the ground floor, being shop No.5758-A, Dev Nagar, Karol Bagh, Delhi 110005.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues before this Court that admittedly both the sons of the petitioner are U.S. citizens and are already working in U.S.A. with their wives, and therefore, whether both the children RC.REV. 222/2...
Tag this Judgment!Kaavya Tea Estate Private Limited and ors. Vs. .........
Court: Delhi
$~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NE W DELHI + Co. Appl. (M) No.117/2014 IN THE MATTER OF KAAVYA TEA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. Through: Mr. Mukesh Advocate Sukhija, CORA M: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER % 04.08.2014 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a first motion joint Application under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short Act) is in connection with a Scheme Amalgamation (for short Scheme) of of Kaavya Tea Estate Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferor No.1/ Applicant Company No 1 ), Marvel Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferor No.2 / Non Applicant Company), Marvel Tea Industries ================================================ CO. Appl. (M) No.117/2014 1 Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferor No.3 / Applicant Company No.2) with Marvel Tea Estate (India) Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferee Company/Non Applicant their respective shareholders Company) and (hereinafter referred Transferor Company No.1...
Tag this Judgment!Yashaswi Aggarwal and anr. Vs. Sh. Rakesh Aggarwal and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:4. h August, 2014 + I.A. No.22682/ 2012 (Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC) in CS (OS) 1561/1994 YASHASWI AGGARWAL AND ANR. Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr. Jeevesh Nagrath, Advocate with Mr. Rikky Gupta, Advocate and Ms. Avsi Malik, Advocate versus SH. RAKESH AGGARWAL AND ORS. Through ..... Defendants Mr. Manish Vashisht, Advocate with Mr. Sameer Vashisht, Advocate and Mr. Y.R. Sharma, Advocate for D-1 and D-2. Mr. Sandeep Sindhwani, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Deepak Sahni, Advocate for D-8. Mr. Ravi Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Lalit Gupta, Advocate for D-14. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL1 By virtue of this order, I propose to dispose of the application under Order 39 Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) read with Section 151 CPC preferred by the Plaintiffs (applicants) for initiating action of contempt against Defendant No.8, her sons Defendants No.4 to 7 and Defendant No.14, Caravan Commercial Company Ltd. for violating th...
Tag this Judgment!Travelite (India) Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:26. 05.2014 Pronounced on :04. 08.2014 + W.P.(C) 3774/2013, C.M. NO.7065/2013 TRAVELITE (INDIA) ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. J.K. Mittal and Sh. Vipul Dubey, Advocates. versus UOI AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Anuj Aggarwal and Sh. Gaurav Khanna, Advocates, for Resp. No.1. Sh. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate, for Service Tax Department. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The assessee (hereafter the petitioner) approaches this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging a letter dated 07-11-2012 of the respondent Commissioner seeking records for the period 2007-08 till 2011-12 for scrutiny of an audit party; Rule 5A (2) is also impugned as ultra vires.2. The petitioner is a registered service tax assessee. It is aggrieved by the letter of the Commissioner of Service Tax (CST) dated 7.11.2012, which sought its records for the years 2...
Tag this Judgment!M/S.Tatvadarshi Bandhu Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Omaxe Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: August 04, 2014 + FAO(OS) 337/2014 M/S.TATVADARSHI BANDHU PVT. LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Amit Sibal, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Tejaswi Kumar Pradhan, Advocate versus OMAXE LIMITED Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.J.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Shalabh Singhal, Mr.Sumeet Batra and Ms.Ankita, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. We shall be referring to the parties as Omaxe and Tatvadarshi.2. On August 04, 2004 a collaboration agreement was entered into between Omaxe and Tatvadarshi. The next day, on August 05, 2004 an addendum was executed.3. In the agreement and the addendum, Tatvadarshi was referred to as the owner. Omaxe was referred to as the developer.4. The collaboration agreement envisaged Tatvadarshi making available land to Omaxe for being developed by Omaxe. After development, the utilizable land was to be shared h...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Vishal Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:02. 07.2014 Pronounced on:04. 08.2014 + W.P.(C) 136/2014, C.M. NO.247/2014 M/S. VISHAL BEVERAGES PVT. LTD. ...... Petitioner Through: Sh. Prem Ranjan Kumar, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Jatan Singh, CGSC, for UOI. Sh. Satish Kumar, Sr. Standing Counsel, for Resp. No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % C.M. NO.247/2014 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 136/2014 1. The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 18.11.2013 of the second respondent, the Central Board of Excise and Customs (the CBEC), made in compliance with the order of this Court in W.P.(C) 136/2014 Page 1 W.P.(C) 1862/2013 dated 12.8.2013, by which it was required to dispose of a request seeking relaxation of time in respect of a plea for unclaimed portion of drawback on the re-exported goods. The first responden...
Tag this Judgment!