Delhi Court January 2015 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
M/S Xerox Modi Corp. Ltd. Vs. The Special Director, Enforcement Direct ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:15. 01.2015 CRL.A. 300/2009 M/S XEROX MODI CORP LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Vijay Nair with Ms. Neeharika Aggarwal, Advocates versus THE SPECIAL DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Mr. Vishal Gohri and Mr. Jitender, Advocates % CRL.A. 58/2009 DR. BHUPENDRA KUMAR MODI ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Shweta Bharti, Mr. Neelesh Sinha and Ms. Mishika Singh, Advocates versus ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Mr. Vishal Gohri and Mr. Jitender, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The present appeals under Section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) have been preferred to assail the common final order dated 24.10.2008 passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange (The Appellate Tribunal) in Appeal Nos.401/2004 and 430/2004. The Appellate Tribunal by the impugned order di...
Dr. Bhupendr Kumar Modi Vs. Enforcement Directorate and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:15. 01.2015 CRL.A. 300/2009 M/S XEROX MODI CORP LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Vijay Nair with Ms. Neeharika Aggarwal, Advocates versus THE SPECIAL DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Mr. Vishal Gohri and Mr. Jitender, Advocates % CRL.A. 58/2009 DR. BHUPENDRA KUMAR MODI ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Shweta Bharti, Mr. Neelesh Sinha and Ms. Mishika Singh, Advocates versus ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Mr. Vishal Gohri and Mr. Jitender, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The present appeals under Section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) have been preferred to assail the common final order dated 24.10.2008 passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange (The Appellate Tribunal) in Appeal Nos.401/2004 and 430/2004. The Appellate Tribunal by the impugned order di...
Isha Vs. Balbir Singh and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1579/2012 IN THE MATTER OF: ISHA Decided on :15. 01.2015 ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Prithu Garg and Mr.Virat K.Anand, Advocates versus BALBIR SINGH AND ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, Advocate for D-2 CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) IA No.2793/2014(u/O VIII R10CPC) 1. The present application has been filed by the plaintiff praying inter alia for pronouncement of judgment against the defendants in view of the fact that they have not filed their written statements within the prescribed period.2. The plaintiff(daughter-in-law of the defendant No.1 and sister-in- law of the defendant No.3) has filed the accompanying suit for passing a decree of possession in her favour in respect of Flat No.103-B, PocketIV, Mayur Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi. The plaintiff has also prayed for a decree of permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from transferring, selling, alienating, or parting with possess...
Cit Vs. Central Warehousing Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:15. 01.2015 + ITA5752012 CIT Through ..... Appellant Mrs. Rubal Maini and Mr. Abhishek Singh Baghel, Advs. for Mr. Balbir Singh, sr. standing counsel versus CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION Through ..... Respondent Mr. Mayank Nagi and Mr. Harkunal Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ITAT) dated 15.7.2011 in ITA1874Del/2011. The ITAT affirmed the order of the CIT(Appeals), but had set aside the assessees second reassessment, pursuant to notice under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, for assessment year 2002-03. It is urged that the findings are erroneous that the reopening of the proceedings was warranted in the circumstances of the case. The assessee, a statutory Central Government corporation, filed its return declaring loss of 2,...
Jitender @ Jeetu Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
$~19 & 20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 79/2011 and Crl. M. (Bail) No.511/2014 Reserved on 13th January, 2015 Delivered on 15th January, 2015 JITENDER @ JEETU Through ..... Appellant : Mr. S.H. Ansari, Adv. Versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI ) Through .... Respondent :Mr. Yogesh Verma, APP with SI Amit Rathee, P.S. Model Town AND + CRL.A. 233/2011 ZAAKIR Through ..... Appellant : Mr. Umardeen, Adv. Versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through ..... Respondent Mr. Yogesh Verma, APP with SI Amit Rathee, P.S. Model Town CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK1 Both the appeals arise from the same incident, FIR and judgment, thus, are being disposed of together.2. Appellants have been convicted under Section 392 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of two years with fine of `2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months by the trial court vide judgment dated 15th December,...
Kadhak Singh Vs. State of Nct of Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: January 15, 2015 + CRL.M.C. No.3293/2014 KADHAK SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. C.S.S.Tomar, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Pravin Bhati, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Rohit Kumar PS Jafrabad Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate alongwith Respondents No.2 & 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % This is a petition filed under Section 482 read with Section 439(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking cancellation of bail granted to respondents No.2 & 3 in case FIR No.186/2012 under Sections 498A/304B/34/302 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station Zafrabad, Delhi. Trial court vide order of 5th May, 2014 has granted bail to respondents-accused observing that deposition of public witnesses has already been recorded. It is also noted in the impugned order that evidence recorded is contradictory in nature. Respond...
Onkar Sharma Vs. Disciplinary Authority-Cum- Dy. General Manager, P
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.9182/2014 15th January, 2015 % ONKAR SHARMA Through: ......Petitioner Ms. Anita Dhingra, Advocate. VERSUS DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY-CUM- DY. GENERAL MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ...... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate with Mr. Gaurav Kumar Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. After crystallizing the issues which have to be decided in the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, I asked the counsel for the petitioner that since in the opinion of this Court this writ petition is a gross abuse of the process of the law whether this Court should pass a judgment on merits and to which counsel for the petitioner states that the case has been argued on merits and the writ petition be decided on merits.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the relief of quashing of the departmental charge sheet ...
Vikas Dhawan and Ors. Vs. The Registrar General Delhi High Court
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
$~7. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.3827/2013 Date of decision:15. h January, 2015 VIKAS DHAWAN & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through Mr. P.S. Bindra, Advocate. versus THE REGISTRAR GENERAL DELHI HIGH COURT ..... Respondent Through Mr. Chetan Lokur, Advocate for Mr. V.R. Datar, Advocate for the Delhi High Court. Mr. Saurabh Tiwari, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 to 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): The petitioners herein are working as Senior Personal Assistants in the Delhi High Court. They have challenged, by way of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Circular bearing No.788/Estt./E.2/DHC dated 20th May, 2013, the relevant portion of which reads as under:Applications are invited from the eligible officials of this Court and of the Courts subordinate to this Court for filling up the existing 32 vacant posts of Private Secretary against 75% te...
M/S Khushi Coal Transport Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1792/2013 M/S KHUSHI COAL TRANSPORT PVT. LTD AND ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr T.L. Garg, Adv. versus % UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr Manish Mohan, CGSC with Ms Puja Sarkar & Ms Manisha Rana Singh, Advs. for R- 1, 2 & 6. Ms Resmitha R. Chandran, Adv. for R- 4 & 5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER1501.2015 1. This is a petition which seeks to assail the decision taken by Coal India Ltd. (CIL), i.e., respondent no.3, with regard to revision of rates of transportation. The impugned decision is dated 08.08.2012. There is also a challenge to consequential orders which are appended as Annexures III, IV and V. These are, in effect, consequential orders categorized by respondent nos. 4 and 5 as approval orders. These approval orders are of even date, i.e., 09.10.2012.2. In order to adjudicate upon the disputes raised in the petition, the following brief facts are required to be noticed. 2.1 The Go...
Ram Kishore Vashisht and Anr. Vs. Food Corporation of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.4564/1997 15th January , 2015 % RAM KISHORE VASHISHT AND ANR. ......Petitioners Through: Mr. H.K.Chaturvedi, Advocate for petitioner no.2. VERSUS FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Ajit Pudussery and Ms. Shruti Sharma Hazarika, Advocates for respondent/ FCI. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India petitioner no.2 had claimed originally a total of five effective reliefs and two other consequential reliefs. Essentially, the petitioner no.2 was seeking lateral movement from the ministerial cadre of the employer/respondent no.1/Food Corporation of India to the movement cadre. Transfer is sought to the movement cadre w.e.f.1993. 2. This writ petition was dismissed by a judgment of this Court on 21.5.2013 inasmuch as, other persons who would have been adversely aff...
- ‹ Prev
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- Next ›
- Last »