Delhi Court September 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 15 of about 257 results (0.020 seconds)North Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs. Mordwaj and ors.
Court: Delhi
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:10. h September, 2014 % + W.P.(C) 3857/2013 NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Gaurang Kanth, Mrs. Biji Rajesh and Mr. Abhay Pratap Singh, Advs. Versus MORDWAJ AND ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms. Rekha Palli and Ms. Garima Sachdeva, Advs. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Vide the present petition, petitioner has assailed the impugned recovery certificate dated 08.04.2013 whereby an amount of Rs.86,21,464/-, for the period from 09.08.1999 to 31.12.2011, was issued against the petitioner.2. Mr. Gaurang Kanth, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the reference before the Industrial Tribunal was as under:Whether the workmen working in Horticulture Department to various Zones in category C are entitled to the benefits of ACP Scheme with effect from 09.08.1999 and if so, what directions are necessary in this respect?.3....
Tag this Judgment!Anshna Properties Private Limited and ors. Vs. ............
Court: Delhi
$~36 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Co. Appl. (M) No.125/2014 IN THE MATTER OF ANSHNA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. ......Applicants Through: Mr. P.K. Mittal Advocate for Applicant Companies. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER % 10.09.2014 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a first motion joint Application under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, (Act) in connection with the Scheme of Amalgamation (Scheme) of Anshna Properties Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as No.1), Gurbachan the Transferor Company Properties (hereinafter referred to as Private Limited the Transferor Company No.2), Rakesh Containers Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Transferor Company No.3), Rakesh ================================================ Co. Appl. (M) No.125/2014 1 Estates Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Transferor Company No.4), Rishma Properties Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Company No.5), Vinu Estates (here...
Tag this Judgment!Hemlata Nambiar and ors Vs. Kishan Kumar Alias Kishan Lal and ors
Court: Delhi
$~R-5. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:10. 09.2014 + MAC.APP. 735/2005 HEMLATA NAMBIAR AND ORS Through ..... Appellants Mr. S.C. Rana, Advocate versus KISHAN KUMAR alias KISHAN LAL AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. S.L. Gupta and Mr. Ram Ashray, Advocates for R3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. The present appeal is filed by the claimants/appellants on account of the death of Shri Anil Kumar Nambiar in a motor accident. The present appeal is filed seeking enhancement of the Awarded compensation as given in the Award dated 05.04.2005.2. The claim petition was filed under section 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.3. The brief facts are that the deceased on 24.04.1995 after closing the printing press where he was working was travelling on his scooter towards his residence at the R.K. Puram side. He was followed in the car by his brother. At outer ring road while taking a turn to the outer ring road leading to Vasant V...
Tag this Judgment!Kamal Bali Vs. State and ors
Court: Delhi
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4126/2014 ..... Petitioner KAMAL BALI Through Mr. Brijesh Sharma, Advocate. versus STATE & ORS Through ..... Respondent Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor. Sub Inspector Brijesh Kumar. Mr. Balvinder Singh, Advocate for R2/complainant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(ORAL) Crl.M.A. No.14162/2014 Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application is disposed off. Crl.M.C. No.4126/2014 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No.44/2009, registered under Section Lodhi Colony, under Section 498A/406 IPC; on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.2. Issue notice. Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, and Mr. Balvinder Singh, Advocate for the second respondent / complainant, enter appearance and accept notice. The petitioner as well as the complainant are also identified by the Investiga...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax -x Vs. Smt. Achila Sabharwal
Court: Delhi
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: September 10, 2014 + ITA5012014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -X ..... Appellant Through Mr.N.P.Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr.Nitin Gultai, Advocate versus SMT. ACHILA SABHARWAL ..... Respondent Through CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) 1. The present appeal by the revenue pertains to assessment year 2010-11. The respondent assessee had filed return declaring income of Rs.44,65,471 on 14.10.2010 and subsequently the return was taken up for scrutiny assessment. The assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs.1.20 Crores on cinematographic films @ 100%. The assessment order records that the assessee was required to file evidence in the form of copies of agreement entered into with the parties. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee did not purchase any cinematographic films for consumption but what was purchased were broadcasting/exhibition rights, s...
Tag this Judgment!Royal Star Trading Company Vs. Ifci Limited and anr
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:10. 09.2014 W.P.(C) 2005/2012 & CM No.16665/2013 ROYAL STAR TRADING COMPANY ..... Petitioner versus IFCI LIMITED & ANR ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Amit Sibal, Sr. Advocate with Mr Vikram Mehta, Mr Varun Tikmani and Mr Gaurang Panandiker. For the Respondents : Mr P.S. Bindra. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition inter alia praying that respondent no.1 be directed to refund a sum of `3,31,00,000/- deposited by the petitioner as a bid amount alongwith interest @18% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of payment.2. The controversy to be addressed in the present petition is whether the petitioner is entitled to refund of the amount paid by the petitioner pursuant to its bid in an auction of movable assets, as the seller has failed to deliver the possession of the auctioned assets.3. Bri...
Tag this Judgment!United Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Manish Kumar Gupta
Court: Delhi
$~28 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. 1127/2013 % Judgment reserved on :07. 08.2014 Judgment pronounced on :10. 09.2014 UNITED INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. S.K. Ray, Mr. Amitava Poddar, Advocates versus MANISH KUMAR GUPTA ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Adv. CORAM HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT I.A. Nos. 18444/2013 (delay in filing) and 18445/2013 (delay in refiling) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Along with the petition the petitioner has also filed I.A.Nos.18444/2013 and 18445/2013 for the condonation of delay in filing and re-filing the present petition.2. It is submitted that the award dated 10.04.2013 was received by the counsel of the petitioner on 16.04.2013 and it was received by the party on 23.04.2013. It is submitted that the present petition was filed on 17.08.2013. It is submitted that i...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Kumar Gupta Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on :03. 09.2014 Judgment delivered on :10. 09.2014 CRL.A. 126/2006 SATISH KUMAR GUPTA Through versus ..... Appellant Mr. Karunesh Tandon, Adv. STATE Through ..... Respondent Ms. Fizani Hussain, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 27.01.2006 and 28.01.2006 respectively wherein he was convicted under Section 13 (2) and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). He was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 18 months and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 3 months for the offence under Section 13 (2) of the said Act; for the offence under Section 7 of the said Act, he was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for two months. 2 The ...
Tag this Judgment!Symed Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sharon Bio-medicine Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:10. h September, 2014 + I.A. No.3159/ 2014 (Order VI Rule 17 CPC in CS (OS) No.1797/ 2012) SYMED LABORATORIES PVT. LTD. Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Gopal Jain, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shwetasree Majum, Advocate and Mr. Prithvi Singh, Advocate. versus SHARON BIO-MEDICINE LTD. AND ORS. Through: ..... Defendants Ms. Rajeshwari H., Advocate for Defendant No.3. Ms. Sunita K. Sreedharan, Advocate for Defendant No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL1 This application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) has been moved by Defendant No.3 (Mankind Pharma Limited) for amendment of the written statement.2. A suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of rights in Patents No.213062 and 213063 titled Novel Intermediates for Linezolid and Related Compounds and A Novel Process for the Preparation of Linezolid and Related Compounds along with damages/ rendition of accounts, etc. was instituted by th...
Tag this Judgment!Manjit Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4485/2013 and Crl.M.A.No.16055/2013 Date of decision :10. h September, 2014 % MANJIT SINGH Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. Jasmeet Singh and Ms.Kritika Mehra, Advs. versus STATE Through : ..... Respondent Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. S. Rumnong, Adv. Mr. Varun Goswami, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT Factual Matrix 1. The petitioner is the registered owner of Ford Endeavour being registration No.DL3 AY5481which was stolen on 20th February, 2009 whereupon FIR No.56/2009 was registered by P.S. Defence Colony. On 20th July, 2009, the car was recovered by the police from the accused persons and it was released by the Court to the petitioner on superdari on 4th August, 2009. The trial against the accused persons is still pending.2. On 5th June, 2013, the petitioner moved an application under Section 451 Cr.P.C. for permission to sell the vehicle on the grounds that it was more than 5 years old, it required lot o...
Tag this Judgment!