Delhi Court August 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 7 of about 306 results (0.009 seconds)Gopi Ram Vs. Rakesh Kumar Aggarwal and anr
Court: Delhi
$~ 22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 2118/2013 % Judgment dated 25.08.2014 GOPI RAM Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr.R.L. Kohli, Advocate versus RAKESH KUMAR AGGARWAL & ANR..... Defendant Through: Ms.Shikha Goyal, Adv. for D=1 Mr.S.V. Tyagi and Ms.Reena Jain Malhotra, Advocates for defendant no.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) I.A. 9627/2014 (u/O.7 R.11 CPC) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for declaration and perpetual injunction. Plaintiff is the father of defendant no.1. Defendant no.2 is a bank, who has advanced loan to defendant no.1.2. Admittedly, defendant no.1 has mortgaged the property bearing No.919/1B, Ward No.7, Mehrauli, New Delhi to the defendant no.2-Bank. As the defendant no.1 did not clear the outstanding loan amount, the bank has declared the account of the defendant no.1 as a NPA and proceedings under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act have been initiated. In the meanwhile, father of defendant no.1 has filed the pres...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Arvind
Court: Delhi
$12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 368/2014 STATE Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr. Varun Goswami, APP with SI Meena Yadav, PS Inderpuri. versus ARVIND ..... Respondent Represented by: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA ORDER2508.2014 % Crl.M.A.8588/2014 For the reasons stated in the application the delay of 32 days in filing the petition is condoned. Crl.L.P.368/2014 1. By the present petition, the State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated November 20, 2013 whereby Arvind has been acquitted of the charge for offences punishable under section 366/376 IPC.2. Learned counsel for the State contends that delay in filing of the FIR ought not to be a ground for discarding the testimony of the prosecutrix. The prosecution has placed the record of the telephone calls to show that the prosecutrix and Arvind were working in a factory and had become friends due to which prosecutrix went to the house of Arvind wh...
Tag this Judgment!Aktiebolaget Volvo and ors. Vs. Babu Lal Sharma and anr
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:22. d August, 2014 + CS(OS) 170/2012 AKTIEBOLAGET VOLVO & ORS. Through: Ms. Tanvi Misra, Advocate .... Plaintiff versus BABU LAL SHARMA & ANR Through: None ..... Defendant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. Present suit has been filed by the plaintiffs for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, dilution of trademark, unfair competition, damages and delivery up.2. Summons were issued in the suit on 23.01.2012. Defendants entered appearance on 15.03.2012 and sought time to file written statement and reply to the interim application but no written statement was filed. None appeared for the defendants on 30.05.2012 and on 01.06.2012, consequently defendants were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 01.06.2012 and the interim order dated 23.01.2012 was made absolute.3. Plaintiffs have filed affidavit by way of evidence of the constituted attorney of plaintiffs, Col. ...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Khem Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 492/2012 & Crl.M.A. 17013/2012 (delay) STATE Represented by: ..... Appellant Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP for the State with SI Roshan Lal, P.S. Nangloi, Delhi Versus KHEM SINGH & ANR. Represented by: .... Respondents Mr. Kaushal Kaushik, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA ORDER2208.2014 % 1. By the present petition, State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated October 24, 2011 passed by the learned ASJ acquitting the respondents of the charge under Section 302/34 IPC.2. In nutshell, the prosecution case is that D.D. No.6 was recorded at PP Nihal Vihar on July 29, 2004 at about 11.20 A.M., regarding a dead body lying at the marriage hall of village Nilothi. On the police reaching the spot they found a dead body having only the undergarments on it with a blood socked pant lying nearby over the roof of the said marriage hall. Bankey Lal, the resident of the said village met at...
Tag this Judgment!M/S G.D. Goenka Private Limited Vs. Standard Chartered Bank
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on August 22, 2014 + W.P.(C) 5341/2014, Cav. 703/2014, CM No.10627-10628/2014 M/S G.D. GOENKA PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Manoj K.Singh, Advocate with Mr.Derendra Singh, Advocate versus STANDARD CHARTERED BANK Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Ateev K.Mathur, Advocate with Mr.Anmol Sharma and Ms.Richa Oberoi, Advocates CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(Oral) CM No.10628/2014 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. Cav. 703/2014 Since the counsel as above appears for the caveator, no further order is required. Caveator shall be heard, as per law. Caveat is disposed of. W.P.(C) 5341/2014 & CM No.10627/2014 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 02.04.2014, passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (DRAT for short), in Miscellaneous Appeal No.314/2013, titled M/s G.D.Goenka Pvt. Ltd. vs. Standard ...
Tag this Judgment!Sajjan Pal Vs. Usha Mehta
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: August 19, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: August 22, 2014 + FAO(OS) 417/2013 SAJJAN PAL Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.A.K.Bajpai and Mr.M.F.Khan, Advocates versus USHA MEHTA Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Pradeep Dewan, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Anupam Dhingra and Mr.Shashank Khurana, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The appellant Sajjan Pal has filed a suit seeking specific performance of a written Agreement to Sell dated July 07, 2010 executed between him and the respondent Usha Mehta.2. The Agreement to Sell concerns flat bearing No.C-105, Sai Baba Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd., Sector-9, Plot No.4, Rohini, Delhi. It records that the agreed sale consideration is `25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs only). It records that Sajjan Pal has paid Usha Mehta `20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs only) through RTGS clearance on July 0...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Raman Grover Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:22. 08.2014 W.P.(C) No.13814/2009 SRI RAMAN GROVER ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent : Ms Rohini Musa : Mr Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Mr Sunil Kumar Jha for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 Mr Arun Birbal for DDA CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceedings has lapsed in view of the provisions of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the new Act).2. The award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 had been made on 19.09.1986. It is, therefore, clear that the award was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the new Act which to...
Tag this Judgment!Jrd Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-ii
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:22. d August, 2014 + INCOME TAX APPEAL12014 JRD STOCK BROKERS (P) LTD. ..... Appellant Through Mr. R.P. Garg and Mr. K.N. Ahuja, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II ..... Respondent Through Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Jr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) The assessee, a Chartered Accountant, was subjected to search on 24th November, 2000 under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short), for providing accommodation entries in the form of share loss or share gain by issuing bills for shares without actual sale and purchase by the party mentioned in the bills. The difference, i.e. gain or loss in sale and purchase was settled by issuing or taking cheques from the party. In case of gain, the party first used to give dummy drafts/cheques or cash against which cheque for the predetermin...
Tag this Judgment!Daya Kishan and ors Vs. Tehsildar - Najafgarh and ors
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 1693/2008 Decided on :22. 08.2014 IN THE MATTER OF DAYA KISHAN & ORS ..... Petitioners Through : Mr. Atul Bandhu, Advocate versus TEHSILDAR - NAJAFGARH & ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr. V.K. Tandon, Advocate. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(ORAL) RP No.500/2009 & CM No.10216/2013 (for condonation of delay) 1. A Review Petition has been filed by the respondent/revenue authorities praying inter alia for review of the order dated 7.1.2009. Accompanying the said application is an application for condonation of delay of 278 days.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioners had filed a petition praying inter alia for issuance of directions to the respondent/revenue authorities to undertake demarcation of the land situated in Khasra No.656 & 657 in Village Sarangpur, New Delhi, in accordance with the records available.3. On 5.3.2008, learned counsel for the petitioners had stated that he had made s...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vi Vs. Climate System Pvt.Ltd.
Court: Delhi
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: August 22, 2014 + ITA4712014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VI ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Rohit Madan, Standing Counsel Versus CLIMATE SYSTEM PVT.LTD. Through: ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J (ORAL) 1. This appeal by the revenue relates to the Assessment Year 2003-04 raises a singular issue, whether Rs. 49,98,072/- debited in the Profit and Loss Account were covered by Section 43A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, in short) and/or was otherwise expenditure of capital nature. The respondent assessee had issued 15% Unsecured Redeemable Non-convertible Debentures carrying interest @15% per annum. In order to repay the debentures, the respondent-assessee borrowed money. The loan was taken against Foreign Currency Non Resident Loan Account [FCNR(B) Loan].. The advantage/benefit was that the loan was availed at a lower rate of interest as compared to intere...
Tag this Judgment!