Delhi Court September 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 14 of about 257 results (0.019 seconds)Surender Singh Vs. Union of India an ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:11. 09.2014 + W.P.(C) 4421/2014 SURENDER SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. M.K. Gaur, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA AN ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Manish Mohan, CGSC with Ms. Manisha Rama Singh, Mr. Gaurav Sharma & Ms. Puja, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(Oral) 1. Mr. Manish Mohan, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that he can assist the Court even in the absence of the counter affidavit which was to be filed by the respondents. The matter is accordingly taken up for final hearing.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was awarded a police medal by the Honble President of India for gallantly fighting the terrorists of Punjab on 7th February, 1992, the day when he received a bullet injury to his spinal cord. The Doctor who attended to him advised that if the bullet is removed from the spinal cord, it can either result in the...
Tag this Judgment!Chander Sekhar and anr Vs. the State and ors
Court: Delhi
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3841/2014 CHANDER SEKHAR & ANR ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Mohit Mathur and Mr. Varun Tyagi, Advocates. versus THE STATE & ORS .... Respondents Through Mr. P. K. Mishra, Additional Public Prosecutor. Sub Inspector Sudeep Punia. Mr. C. S. Gupta, Advocate with Mr. N. K. Arora, Director / A.R. of complainant company. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR11398 registered at police station Karol Bagh on 23.03.1998 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.2. Issue notice. Mr. P. K. Mishra, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, and Mr. C.S. Gupta, Advocate for the second respondent / complainant, enter appearance and accept notice. In addition, Mr. N. K. Arora, Director of the second respondent, is present in person, and is stated to be duly authori...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshwar Dayal and ors Vs. Satish @ Satbir and ors
Court: Delhi
$~27 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4102/2014 RAMESHWAR DAYAL & ORS .... Petitioners Through Mr. Vikas Yadav and Upma Yadav, Advocates with petitioners. versus SATISH @ SATBIR & ORS ..... Respondents Through Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor. Sub Inspector Ramesh Kumar. H.C. Manoj. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.A. No.14081/2014 Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application is disposed off. Crl.M.C. No.4102/2014 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No.504/2014 registered under Section 323/452/34 IPC at police station Nihal Vihar on 04.08.2014, on the ground that the matter has been settled between the petitioners and the respondents 1, 2 and 3. The FIR came to be lodged at the instance of respondent No.1 Satish.2. Issue notice. Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, enters appearance and accepts notice. Resp...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
$~26. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL No.586/2014 Date of decision:11. h September, 2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Sr.Standing Counsel. versus M/S THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Mayank Nagi & Mr. Tarun Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): This appeal by the Revenue relates to Assessment Year 1992-93 and impugns order dated 4th March, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) upholding the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting penalty of Rs.44,42,839/- imposed by the Assessing Officer under Section 13 of the Interest Tax Act, 1974 (Act, for short).2. The respondent-assessee, a Government of India undertaking, was engaged in the business of general insurance during the period in question. Pursuant to the return filed by the respondent-assessee, ...
Tag this Judgment!Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. Vs. Lemon Entertainment Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:11. h September, 2014 + CS (OS) No.1891/ 2012 SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LTD. Through: ..... Plaintiff Ms. Prachi Aggarwal, Adv. with Mr. K.K. Khetan, Adv. versus PAL NEWS MEDIA PVT. LTD. Through: + ..... Defendant Mr. Niraj Jha, Adv. CS (OS) No.2185/ 2012 SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LTD. Through: ..... Plaintiff Ms. Prachi Aggarwal, Adv. with Mr. K.K. Khetan, Adv. versus LEMON ENTERTAINMENT LTD. Through: ..... Defendant Mr. Niraj Jha, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL G.P. MITTAL,J.(Oral) I.A. No.20056/ 2013 (O. IX Rule 13 CPC) in CS (OS) No.1891/2012 I.A. No.13876/ 2013 (O. IX Rule 13 CPC) in CS (OS) No.2185/ 2012 1. These applications under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) have been filed by the applicant/ judgment debtor (JD) for setting aside of the ex-parte I.A. No.20056/2013 in CS (OS) No.1891/2012 judgments and decrees dated 26.07.2013 and 07.05.2013 respectively.2....
Tag this Judgment!Rudraksha Constructions Vs. Tele Communications Consultants India Ltd ...
Court: Delhi
$~ 10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 2659/2011 % Judgment dated 11.09.2014 RUDRAKSHA CONSTRUCTIONS ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr.Sushil Kumar, Advocate versus TELE COMMUNICATIONS CONSULTANTS INDIA LTD & ANR ..... Defendant Through: Mr.P.K. Bansal, Advocate for the defendant no.1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) I.A. 2695/2013 & I.A. 16697/2012 1. I.A. 2695/2013 has been filed by the defendant no.2 under Order 7 Rule 11 read with 151 CPC for dismissal of the suit on the ground that the present suit is barred by limitation and for want of cause of action.2. I.A. 16697/2012 has been filed by the defendant no.1 under Order 7 Rule 11 read with 151 CPC for rejection of plaint and for dismissal of the suit.3. Counsel for the defendants submit that the suit filed by the plaintiff is hopelessly barred by limitation; and a bare reading of the plaint would show that the payments sought are with respect to the bills which pertain to the year 2002, wher...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Lakshmi Marwah and anr Vs. State
Court: Delhi
$~36. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + TEST.CAS. 88/2011 % Judgment dated 11.09.2014 VIJAY LAKSHMI MARWAH & ANR ..... Petitioners Through : Mr.Anand Nandan and Mr.Ashish Tiwari, Advs. versus STATE Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Rajat Aneja and Ms.Rashmi Verma, Advs. for Objector no.1. Mr.Puneet Verma and Mr.Kirti Parmar, Advs. for Objector no.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. By the present petition filed under Section 276 read with Section 228 of Indian Succession Act, 1925, the petitioners seek probate/letters of administration with respect to the Will dated 30.8.2006 of late Smt.Shakuntala Rani @ Smt.Dayawanti Taneja.2. Notice in this petition was issued to the State and also to the close relations. Valuation report has been received. Copy of citation has also been filed. Objections have been filed by Sh.Vijay Pratap Taneja and Sh.Vikram Taneja.3. Today, both the Objectors, Sh.Vijay Pratap Taneja and Sh.Vikram Taneja, are present in Court. ...
Tag this Judgment!Siddarth Singh (Minor) Thru Avatar Singh Rawat Vs. the Vice Chancellor ...
Court: Delhi
33 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4794/2014 & CM APPL. 9552/2014 SIDDARTH SINGH (MINOR) THRU AVATAR SINGH RAWAT ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Avtaar Singh Rawat in person with Mr. Virendra Rawat and Mr. Hitesh Kumar, Advocates. versus THE VICE CHANCELLOR, DELHI UNIVERSITY & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Saurabh Banerjee, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Amit Khemka, Advocate with Mr. Rishi Sehgal, Advocate for respondent No.4. Date of Decision :10. h September, 2014 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:a) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the admission to the petitioner in B.Com (Hons.) for 2014 under the sports quota; b) direct the respondents to relax the provisions where the Mathematics is one of the subject for getting admission in B.Com (Hons.) c) direct the respondent No.4 to give provisional admission in B.Com (Hons.) till...
Tag this Judgment!Dushyant Kumar Vs. M.C.D. of Delhi and anr
Court: Delhi
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:10. h September, 2014 % + W.P.(C) 5512/2011 DUSHYANT KUMAR ..... Petitioner Represented by:Mr. Rajiv Agarwal and Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advs. versus M.C.D. OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Represented by:Mr. Arvind Kumar Verma and Mr. Amitabh Verma, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner seeks direction for setting aside the impugned award dated 08.08.2008 passed by the Industrial Adjudicator in ID No.183/95.2. Mr. Rajiv Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the terms of reference vide notification No.F-24 (1022)/95/Lab- 19558-63 dated 07.07.95 are as under:Whether the services of Sh. Dushyant Kumar have been terminated illegally and/or unjustifiably by the management and if so, to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect?.3. Accordingly, the learned Presiding Officer framed the issues as under:(i) Whethe...
Tag this Judgment!Efacec Switchgear India Pvt. Ltd Vs. .............
Court: Delhi
$~29 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CO.PET. 384/2014 IN THE MATTER OF EFACEC SWITCHGEAR INDIA PVT. LTD. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Sandeep Bhuraria Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. P.K. Mallik, Assistant Registrar of Companies for the Regional Director Mr. P.D Tewari, Assistant the Official Liquidator. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER % 10.09.2014 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) CA No.2044/2014 This is an application by the Official Liquidator seeking condonation of delay in filing the report. Learned counsel for the Petitioner has no objection to the delay being condoned. For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the report is condoned. The report is directed to be taken on record. ================================================== CO.PET. 384/2014 1 CO.PET. 384/2014 1. This second motion joint petition has been filed under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) seeking sanction of the Scheme ...
Tag this Judgment!