Delhi Court September 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 20 of about 257 results (0.022 seconds)Commissioner of Income Tax-iv Vs. Holcim India P. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: September 05, 2014 + ITA No.486/2014 & ITA No.299/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Kamal Sawhney, Sr.Standing Counel with Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Jr.Standing Counsel versus HOLCIM INDIA P. LTD. Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Satyen Sethi, Advocate with Mr.Arta Trana Panda, Advocate CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(Oral) 1. The following substantial question of law is proposed in these two appeals by the appellant-Revenue which pertain to the Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2008-09:Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 8,61,50,315/- in Assessment Year 2007-08 and Rs. 6,60,93,678/- in assessment year 2008-09 holding that no dividend income was earned by the assessee ignoring the provisions under Section 14A.2. At the outset, we notice that the Inc...
Tag this Judgment!Ms. Gagan Dhir Nee Manocha Vs. Punjab and Sind Bank and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.R.P.No.136/2014 5th September, 2014 % MS. GAGAN DHIR NEE MANOCHA ......Petitioner Through: Mr. Satyender Chahar, Advocate. VERSUS PUNJAB & SIND BANK & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. No.14634/2014 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. + C.R.P. No.136/2014 2. The challenge by means of this petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned order of the trial court dated 2.5.2014 by which the trial court refused to set aside the judgment/order dated 1.9.2009 decreeing the suit of the respondent no.1/bank under Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC. The suit was decreed by dismissing the leave to defend application for non-prosecution.3. Since the aforesaid impugned order is a short order, I reproduce the same as under:1. This is to adjudicate upon the applicat...
Tag this Judgment!The Chief Administrative Officer, Central Organisa Vs. Hmt Machine Too ...
Court: Delhi
$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: September 05, 2014 + W.P.(C) 5796/2014 THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, CENTRAL ORGANISATION FOR MODERNIZATION OF WORKSHOP (COFMOW) ..... Petitioner Through Mr.A.S.Dateer, Advocate versus HMT MACHINE TOOLS AND ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr.K.Venkatraman, Advocate for R-1 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J (ORAL) Cav.752/2014 Since the counsel as above appears for the caveator/respondent No.1, the caveat stands discharged. C.M No.14265/2014 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. C.M No.14266/2014 For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned. Application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 5796/2014 1. The petitioner herein is a Government of India Undertaking. The respondent No.1, the contesting respondent is also a Government of India undertaking M/s HMT Machine Tools Ltd.2. Certain supplies were made by r...
Tag this Judgment!Rohit JaIn Vs. Promila Kumar and Others
Court: Delhi
$~21. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1439/2014 % Judgment dated 05.09.2014 ROHIT JAIN Through : ..... Plaintiff Mr.Virender Ganda, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Mr.Vipul Ganda, Mr.S.K. Giri and Mr.Parmod Sachdeva, Advs. versus PROMILA KUMAR & OTHERS ..... Defendants Through : Mr.Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv. with Ms.Padma Priya and Mr.Gaurav Wadera, Adv. for defendant no.1 and for applicants in I.A.16337/2014 Mr.Vipin Jain and Mr.Vipul Jain, Advs. for defendant no.3. Mr.Kunal Sharma, Adv. for defendant/DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 16337/2014 (O1R10 1. Present application has been filed by the applicants/Mr.R.M. Kapur, Mrs.Charu Garg, and Mrs.Rita Gupta seeking impleadment as defendants in the present suit. Applicant no.1, Mr.R.M. Kapur, seeks impleadment on the ground that he is the owner of the suit property and applicants no.2 and 3 seek impleadment on the ground that applicant no.1 has executed sale deeds in their favour for two separ...
Tag this Judgment!Sh.Mahesh Kumar Vs. Sh.Pritam Chand (Since Deceased) Thr. Lrs
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC. REV. No.302/2013 & CM No.12578/2013(stay) 5th September , 2014 % SH.MAHESH KUMAR Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Yashwant Jain, Advocate VERSUS SH.PRITAM CHAND (SINCE DECEASED) THR. LRS....... Respondents Through: Mr. Man Mohan Gupta, Advocate CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred as to the Act) is filed against the impugned judgment of the Additional Rent Controller dated 31.5.2013 by which the Additional Rent Controller has dismissed the leave to defend application filed in the bona fide necessity eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act and the eviction petition has been decreed with respect to the tenanted premises being the first floor of the property No.1308, Gali Gulian, Near Dharampura, Jama Masjid, Delhi 110006.2. The respondents/landlords filed the subjec...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Rehana
Court: Delhi
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 539/2014 STATE Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Sanjeev Bhandari, Additional Standing Counsel for the State with Inspector Rakesh Kumar, PS GTB Enclave. versus REHANA ..... Respondent Represented by: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA ORDER0509.2014 % Crl.M.A.No.13478/2014 (Exemption) Allowed. Crl.M.A.No.13479/2014 (Delay in refiling) For the reasons stated in the application the delay of 16 days in refiling the leave to appeal petition is condoned. CRL.L.P. 539/2014 1. The State is aggrieved of the respondent being acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 IPC in case FIR No.204/2011 registered at PS GTB Enclave, Delhi. The impugned judgment is dated April 23, 2014.2. The case of the prosecution is that an information was received through PCR at GTB Enclave Police Station on August 10, 2011, recorded vide DD No.28A, informing that a person was lying in burnt co...
Tag this Judgment!Hemant Kumar Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4010/2014 HEMANT KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Ajit Kumar Jain, Adv. Versus STATE & ANR Through : ..... Respondents Mr.P.K.Mishra, APP. SI Shailendra Kumar Singh, PS Khajuri Khas. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) 1. This is a petition moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of FIR No.127/2003 under Section 498A IPC registered at Police Station Khajuri Khas, on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties.2. Issue notice. Counsel for the State enters appearance and accepts notice. The second respondent is also present in person and she accepts notice. The second respondent complainant filed the aforesaid FIR stating therein that she was married to the petitioner on 15 th February, 2001 and thereafter some disputes arose between them as a result of marital discord. After filing of the chargesheet, the charge was al...
Tag this Judgment!Salil Maheshwari Vs. the High Court of Delhi and anr
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:20. 08.2014 Pronounced on:05. 09.2014 + W.P.(C) 4976/2014, C.M. NOS. 9954/2014 & 9955/2014 SALIL MAHESHWARI ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. R.K. Kapoor and Ms. S. Rama, Advocates. Versus THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AND ANR...... Respondents Through : Sh. Rajiv Bansal and Sh. Avirai Kumar, Advocates, for the DHC. Ms. Sana Ansari, for Ms. Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel (Civil), for Resp. No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the framing of a question paper for the Delhi Judicial Service (DJS) Preliminary Examination, 2014 by the first respondent, the Delhi High Court, as being contrary to the law laid down in the case of Gunjan Sinha Jain v. Registrar General High Court of Delhi, in W.P.(C). No.449/2012.2. The writ petitioner is a law graduate who, in accordance with ...
Tag this Judgment!Keshav Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. No.155 of 2010 Reserved on:28. h August 2014 Decision on:5. h September 2014 KESHAV KUMAR Through: ..... Appellant Mr.Dharmendra Vashisht and Mr. Sumit Kalra, Advocates Versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Isha Khanna, APP Inspector Yashwant, PS: Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT509.2014 1. The Appellant challenges the judgment dated 12th December 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) in SC No.21/2006 convicting the Appellant for the offences under Sections 306 and 498A IPC. The Appellant also challenges the order on sentence dated 21st December 2009 whereby for the offence under Section 306 IPC, the Appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for five years along with a fine of Rs. 5,000 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for three months. For the offence under Section 498A IPC, the Appellant was sentenced to undergo RI for one year along with a fine of...
Tag this Judgment!Dhananajay Kumar @ Pyare Lal Vs. State (Govt. of Nct) of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: September 01, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: September 04, 2014 % + CRL.A. 912/2013 DHANANAJAY KUMAR @ PYARE LAL ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Chetan Anand, Advocate versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Dhananjay Kumar is convicted of the offence of murder of his wife Chanchal whom he married 7-8 months prior to the incident by the impugned judgment dated March 19, 2013 and by the order on sentence dated March 23, 2013 he has been directed to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of ` 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for two years.2. Dhananjay Kumar assails the judgment on the ground that there is no eye-witness to the incident. All the witnesses are interested witnesses and relations of the deceased. There are material c...
Tag this Judgment!