Delhi Court August 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 5 of about 306 results (0.028 seconds)Prit Pal Singh BhasIn Vs. S. Ranbir Singh and Others
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:25. h August, 2014 + I.A.No.12412/2011 (Order VI Rule 17 CPC) in CS(OS) 2086/2008 PRIT PAL SINGH BHASIN Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Praveen Kumar, Adv. versus S. RANBIR SINGH & OTHERS ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Subhash Chand, Adv. For D-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL1 This is an application under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) seeking amendment of the plaint.2. A suit for possession, permanent injunction and grant of mesne profits was filed by the Plaintiff alleging that property bearing municipal no.XIV/11186-A, Bagh Rao ji, known as Doriwalan, Delhi measuring 135 sq.yds was owned by Late Sardar Darshan Singh Bhasin. On 02.04.2000, Late Sardar Darshan Singh Bhasin died intestate in USA leaving behind his widow i.e. Defendant no.3 and children, i.e. the Plaintiff and Defendants no.5 to 7. Another small portion measuring about 25 sq. yds adjacent to the property owned...
Tag this Judgment!Parambir Singh Vs. State and Another
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:25. h August, 2014 + TEST. CAS. 70/ 2011 PARAMBIR SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Amarveer S. Bhullar, Advocate & Mr. Mandeep Bansal, Advocate. Versus STATE & ANOTHER Through: ..... Respondent Nemo CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL1 This petition under Section 274 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (the Act) for grant of probate is in respect of the Will dated 08.12.2003 executed by Late Rajinder Singh and duly registered in the office of Sub-Registrar-II, Janakpuri, New Delhi vide Registration No.53070, Book No.III, Pages 86-89, Volume No.6070.2. It is alleged that deceased Rajinder Singh (Testator) died on 31.07.2010 at New Delhi leaving behind his wife Samittar Kaur, his son Satinder Pal Singh and two married daughters Amarjeet Kaur and Swaran Jit Kaur. He left behind several immovable properties, i.e. Quarter No.40/ 4, Double Story, Tihar-II, Ashok Nagar, New Delhi; Land House Tubewell etc. at Village Dhaulpur, Tehsil...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S Navodaya Castles Pvt Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL No.320/2012 Reserved on:17. h July, 2014 Date of Decision:25. h August, 2014 % COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. Versus M/S NAVODAYA CASTLES PVT LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Ved Jain and Mr. Pranjal Srivastava, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.: Revenue in this appeal, which relates to assessment year 200203, has raised the following substantial question of law:Whether the ITAT fell into error in upholding the deletion of Rs.54 lakh, which was directed to be added back by virtue of section 68 of the Income Tax Act on the ground that assessee has discharged the onus of proving the identity and creditworthiness of the share subscriber and the genuineness of the subscription?.2. The appeal arises out of the impugned order dated 31st October, 2011, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ...
Tag this Judgment!Lurgi India International Services Private Limite Vs. ..........
Court: Delhi
$~32 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Co. Appl. (M) No.122/2014 IN THE MATTER OF LURGI INDIA INTERNATIONAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ......Applicant Through: Mr. Niraj Kumar and Mr Achint Singh Gyani, Advocates for Applicant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA % ORDER2508.2014 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) CA. 1882/2014 (Exemption) Exemption is allowed, subject to just exception. Co. Appl. (M) No.122/2014 1. This is a first motion Application under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) connection with a Scheme of is in Amalgamation (Scheme) of Air Liquide Engineering India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Transferor ================================================== Co. Appl. (M) No.122/2014 1 Company) with Lurgi India International Services Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Applicant/Transferee Company) and their respective Shareholders. A copy of the Scheme has been enclosed with the Application.2. The registered Company is o...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Iii Vs. M/S R.R. Holdings Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No.143/2001 Reserved on:17. h July, 2014 Date of Decision:25. h August, 2014 % COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III ....Appellant Through Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar, advocate. Versus M/S R.R. HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. Through None. Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax, 1961 (Act, for short) pertains to assessment year 1988-89 and emanates from order dated 22nd February, 2001 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) on an appeal filed by the respondent-assessee (hereinafter, referred to as assessee).2. By order dated 18th September, 2002, while admitting the present appeal, the following substantial question of law was framed:Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in deleting the interest of Rs.45,92,475/- levied by the Assessing Officer under secti...
Tag this Judgment!Small Industries Development Bank of India Vs. Nirmaan Bharati Samajik ...
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:25. 08.2014 CO. PET. 107/2011& CA3632011 SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA versus NIRMAAN BHARATI SAMAJIK AND ARTHIK VIKAS SANGATHAN ..... Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Dinesh Agnani, Sr. Advocate with Ms Leena Tuteja and Ms Dolly Sharma. For the Respondents : Mr Aakarsh Kamra. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner bank under Sections 433(e) and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) inter alia praying for winding up of the respondent company on the ground that the respondent company had failed and neglected to pay a sum of `6,28,31,972/- alongwith interest, which was claimed as due and payable by the respondent company on account of the loan agreements dated 06.03.2007 and 20.02.2008 for `50 lacs and `600 lacs respectively.2. Briefly stated, the rele...
Tag this Judgment!M. Vadivelu Vs. Rajkishan and Company and ors.
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:25. 08.2014 W.P.(C) 336/2008 & CM6512008 M. VADIVELU ..... Petitioner versus RAJKISHAN & COMPANY & ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Vinay Sabharwal & Ms Neha Sabharwal For the Respondents : Mr Sanjoy Bhaumik for R-1. Mr S. K. Taneja, Sr. Advocate with Mr Puneet Taneja for R-2 CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner impugns an order dated 11.04.2007 (hereinafter referred to as the impugned order) passed by the Labour Court, Delhi in LCA No.49/2006. By the impugned order, the Labour Court has dismissed an application filed by the petitioner under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) claiming arrears of salary and other allowances from February 1993 till the date of his superannuation in 1998.2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1 appointed the petitioner as Quality Surveyor ...
Tag this Judgment!Pappu @ Jolly Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: August 25, 2014 + CRL.A. 1096/2012 PAPPU @ JOLLY Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms.Nandita Rao, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP SI Amit Rathel, P.S. Model Town CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Pappu @ Jolly has been convicted for the offence of having murdered his friend Sanjay by causing stab injuries in the intervening night of 9th and 10th April, 2008 in a room on the second floor of Jhuggi No.N-25A/85, Lal Bagh, near Jhanda Chowk, Delhi. The conviction has been rested on the finding that the testimony of Bilal Ahmed PW-11 and Lalit Pandit PW-13 established a motive of Pappu believing that Sanjay was having an evil eye on his daughter Pinki. In other words, motive for Pappu being to discontinue Sanjays relations with his daughter by removing Sanjay from the world of the living. The learned Trial ...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Chand Kasana and anr. Vs. Chandra Shekhar Yadav and anr.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :24. h July 2014 Decided on :25. h August, 2014 + MAC.APP. 203/2014 and CM Appl.4224/2014 SATISH CHAND KASANA & ANR. ..... Appellants Through Mr.Rana Mukherjee, Mr.Pritpal Singh Nijjar, Mr.Harsh Chopra and Ms.Kasturika Kaumudi, Advocates. versus CHANDRA SHEKHAR YADAV & ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr.A.K.Soni, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.1. By the present appeal, the appellants the driver and owner of the offending vehicle (Tractor-trolley) challenge the Award dated 16.02.2013 passed in a petition filed by the claimants/respondents under Sections 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act.2. On 08.07.2009, respondent No.1 was going on a motorcycle along with his friend Sh. Mohan Lal. At Maharaja Hotel, it is said that a tractor trolley hit respondent No.1 and he suffered injuries.3. Based on the evidence of the parties, the tribunal recorded that the accident took place due to rash and neglig...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh Rishi Dev Vs. State (Gnct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 488 of 2014 Reserved on: August 12, 2014 Decision on: August 25, 2014 RAJESH RISHI DEV ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Anwesh Madhukar, Advocate. versus STATE (GNCT of DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP. WITH CRL.A. 440 of 2014 PANKAJ BHAGAT ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Ms. Pinky Dubey, Mr. Shiv Chopra, Mr. Pulkit Misra and Ms. Namita Wali, Advocates. versus STATE (GNCT of DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP with SI Jatinder Kumar, PS: Mahendra Park, Delhi. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER2508.2014 1. These appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 2nd January 2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) convicting the Appellants for the offence under Sections 363 read with Section 365 read with Section 34 IPC and additionally convicting Appellant Raj Rishi Dev (Accused No.1)[A-1]. for the offence under Section 368, as well as the order on sentence dated 1...
Tag this Judgment!