Delhi Court September 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 25 of about 257 results (0.017 seconds)Deep Singh and anr Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3957/2014 DEEP SINGH & ANR ..... Petitioners Through Mr Pragyan Sharma and Mr Sanjay Kumar Dubey, Advs. versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr P K Mishra, APP for State with SI Khukd Akhtar PS B H Rao, Delhi Mr Subhash Chand, Adv. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.A.13544/2014(exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The applications stand disposed off. CRL.M.C. 3957/2014 & Crl.M.A.13543/2014 1. This petition has been moved by the petitioners under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for quashing of FIR No.81/2008 under section 419/420/486/471/34 dated 21.7.2008 registered at Police Station Bara Hindu Rao, Delhi and criminal proceedings pending in the Court of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between party.2. Issue notice. Mr. P.K.Mishra, ...
Tag this Judgment!Akhilesh Kumar Verma Vs. Maruti Udyog Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
* $~5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA (OS) No.112/2011 Date of Decision:02. d September, 2014 AKHILESH KUMAR VERMA ..... APPELLANT Through : Appellant in person. Versus MARUTI UDYOG LTD. & ORS. ..... RESPONDENTS Through : Mr.T.K. Ganju, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Aquib Ali, Adv. RFA (OS) No.120/2011 MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. ..... APPELLANT Through : Mr.T.K. Ganju, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Aquib Ali, Adv. Versus AKHILESH KUMAR VERMA & ORS. .RESPONDENTS Through : Respondent no.1 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR GITA MITTAL, J (ORAL) 1. By this judgment, we are disposing these appeals whereby the judgment and decree dated 26th September, 2011 passed in CS (OS) No.1917/1995 has been impugned.2. For the purposes of convenience, we propose to refer to the parties as per their nomenclature in the suit proceedings. The facts giving rise to the litigation are within a narrow compass and are briefly noticed hereafter.3. The plaintiff Akhilesh Kumar Ver...
Tag this Judgment!Satyender Verma and ors Vs. State of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3963/2014 SATYENDER VERMA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr Pawan Yadav, Adv. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through Ms Nishi Jain, APP with SI Jagdish Chander, PS Palam Village Mr Vinay Kumar, Adv. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.A.13588/2014(Delay) For the reasons stated in the application the delay in re-filing the petition is condoned. The application stands disposed off. CRL.M.C. 3963/2014 1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been moved by petitioners seeking quashing of FIR No.27/2012 under section 498A/406/34 IPC dated 10.2.2012 registered at Police Station Palam Village on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties.2. Issue notice. Counsel for the State as well counsel for complainant, who is arrayed as respondent No.2, enter appearance and accepts notice.3. The complainan...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Frick India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
$~R-72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:2. d September, 2014 + ITA1462002 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Jr. Standing Counsel. versus FRICK INDIA LTD. Through .... Respondent Mr. Mayank Nagi, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) relates to assessment year 1997-98 and was admitted for hearing vide order dated 28 th November, 2002, on the following substantial question of law:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the capital asset transferred was a long term capital asset?.2. The respondent-assessee, a company, in their return for the assessment year in question had declared long-term capital gains of Rs.6.78 crores on account of surrender of tenancy r...
Tag this Judgment!Vikram Sharma and ors Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3112/2014 VIKRAM SHARMA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Mahesh Verma, Advocate. versus STATE & ANR Through ..... Respondents Mr. O. P. Saxena, Additional Public Prosecutor . Mr. S. K. Chawla, Advocate with complainant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA % SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.(Oral) 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.480/2012 under Sections 498-A, 406, 34 IPC registered at police station Vijay Vihar, on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.2. Issue notice. Mr. O.P. Saxena, APP for the State, and Mr. S.K. Chawla, Advocate for the complainant, accept notice.3. It is stated that the aforesaid FIR came to be registered at the instance of respondent No.2 / complainant on account of certain disputes in connection with the marriage of the complainant with the first petitioner Vikram Sharma. It is stated that the complainant and the first petitioner have since also o...
Tag this Judgment!Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd Vs. Umesh Kumar Rai and An ...
Court: Delhi
$~ 48 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 2894/2012 Date of decision :02. d September, 2014 % HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr.Ajay Saroya and Mr.Neeraj Kumar, Advocates versus UMESH KUMAR RAI AND ANOTHER ..... Defendant Through: Mr.K.K. Jha and Ms.Indra V.Kumar Singh, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) IA.No.8747/2013 1. This is an application filed by the defendant no.1 seeking unconditional leave to defend.2. Plaintiff has filed the present suit under the provisions of Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure. The present suit is based on a written agreement as also statement of account. The case of the plaintiff in a nutshell is that the defendants no.1 and 2 jointly approached the plaintiff in the capacity of borrower and builder, respectively, for availing of housing loan by the defendant no.1 for purchase of a flat No.3072, 7th floor, T-3, Shivkala Charms, Plot No.7, Sector- PI-II, Great...
Tag this Judgment!Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board Vs. Sanjeev Kumar
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:02. 09.2014 + W.P.(C) 5706/2014, CAV. 744/2014, C.M. NOS.14087/2014 & 14088/2014 DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD ..... Petitioner Through : Ms. Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel (Civil) versus SANJEEV KUMAR ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Shailesh Suman, Sh. Abhishek Kumar Rao and Ms. Bhavya Bharti, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % CAV.744/2014 Learned counsel for the respondent has put in appearance. Cav. 744/2014 accordingly stands discharged. C.M. No.14088/2014 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 5706/2014 Page 1 W.P.(C) 5706/2014, C.M. No.14087/2014 1. The petitioner, Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) is aggrieved by an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 13.01.2014 in O.A. No.4380/2012 whereby the respondents application was allowed, with a direction that in the...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd Zeeshan Vs. Mohd Tahir
Court: Delhi
$~22. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 2105/2013 % Date of Decision : September 01, 2014 MOHD ZEESHAN ..... Plaintiff Through : Mr.Ashutosh Rana and Mohd. Aslam, Advocates versus MOHD TAHIR ..... Defendant Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for specific performance of an Agreement dated 13.03.2012 and permanent injunction.2. Summons in the suit and notice in the application were issued on 9.12.2013. Upon service counsel for the defendant entered appearance on 2.5.2014 however neither Vakalatnama was filed nor the written statement was filed. The Joint Registrar placed the matter before court on 25.07.2014. On 25.07.2014 counsel for the defendant stated that she would file her written statement along with an appropriate application. None has appeared on behalf of the defendant today. Hence it is prayed that the present suit be decreed under order VIII Rule 10 CPC.3. The plaint is duly...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Sagar JaIn Vs. M/S Aditya Overseas and anr
Court: Delhi
$~ 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 78/2006 Date of decision :1. t September, 2014 % PREM SAGAR JAIN Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr.Ramesh Kumar, Adv. versus M/S ADITYA OVERSEAS AND ANR. Through: None ..... Defendant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.44,44,755/-. Summons were issued in the suit on 17.1.2006. Defendants entered appearance and also filed their written statement. Thereafter following issues were framed on 4.8.2008: (i) Whether the defendants had returned the goods subject matter of six bills to the plaintiff as stated in para 2 of the preliminary objections?. OPD (ii) Whether the goods supplied by the plaintiff to the defendants under the remaining three bills were sub standard as stated in para 3 of the preliminary objections, if so, to what effect?. OPD (iii) To what amount, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to?. OPP (iv) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any intere...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Ravi
Court: Delhi
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 321/2014 STATE Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State. versus RAVI ..... Respondent Represented by: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA ORDER0109.2014 % Crl.M.A.No.7425/2014 (Delay) For the reasons stated in the application the delay of 77 days in filing the leave petition is condoned. CRL.L.P. 321/2014 1. The State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated November 08, 2013 acquitting the respondent of the charge for offences punishable under Sections 323/367/377/506 IPC.2. The case of the prosecution is that Ravi kidnapped a minor boy aged ten years with the intention to subject him to unnatural lust and finally committed voluntary carnal intercourse with the victim child and threatened to kill him. Ravi is also alleged to have caused simple hurt to the victim by giving slap to him.3. The victim child deposed that on the day of incident he wen...
Tag this Judgment!