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.
Phoolwati Vs. Natho Devi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2015
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RSA No.10/2015 + Decided on :12. h January, 2015 PHOOLWATI ..... Appellant Through: Mr.R.P.S.Sirohi, Adv. versus NATHO DEVI & ORS ..... Respondent Through CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI % CM No.480/2015 ORDER1201.2015 1. Allowed subject to deficiency being rectified.2. The application stands disposed of. R.S.A. No.10/2015 1. This is a regular second appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 21.11.2014 passed by the learned Addl.District Judge by virtue of which the appeal of the appellant had been dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the trial court on 28.03.2013 in Suit No.347/2008 against the appellant has been upheld.2. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the judgment of the trial court as well as the first appellate court suffer from perversity as there is no evidence on record with regard to the factum of ownership of the property in question in respect of which decree has been pas...
Mahadev Prasad Khanna Vs. Union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:12. 01.2015 W.P.(C) 6696/2014 and CM No.15889/2014 ... Petitioner MAHADEV PRASAD KHANNA versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Ms Malavika Lal and Mr Avishkar Singhvi For the Respondent No.1 : Mr Anil Soni For the Respondent No.2 : Mr Pawan Mathur For the Respondent No.3 & 4: Mr Siddharth Panda For the DMRC : Mr A.S. Rao, Law Officer CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The learned counsel for the Land Acquisition Collector (respondent No.4) has handed over the counter affidavit which is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder to this affidavit and shall be relying on the averments made in the writ petition.2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and...
Inder Singh Vs. Under Secretary,ministry of Home Affairs
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2015
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:12. h January, 2015 % + LPA No.2/2015 & CM No.2/2015 (for condonation of 114 days delay in re-filing the appeal) INDER SINGH Through: .. Appellant Dr. Alok Sharma, Adv. Versus UNDER SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS .. Respondent Through: Mr. Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr. Vinod Tiwari, Adv. for UOI. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 This intra-court appeal impugns the order dated 1st July, 2014 of the learned Single Judge of this Court of dismissal in limine, on the ground of laches, of W.P.(C) No.2818/2014 preferred by the appellant.2. Though this appeal is accompanied with an application for condonation of 114 days delay in re-filing thereof and further though there is no valid ground shown for condonation of such long delay in re-filing but having prima facie not found any merit in the appeal also, we have, without adverting to the delay, heard the counsel fo...
Cit-Xi Vs. Sh. Tej Pal Singh Kohli
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2015
$~ 3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:12. 01.2015 + ITA22015 CIT-XI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P.Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Mr.Nitin Gulati & Mr.Juoy James, Jr. Standing Counsel versus SH. TEJ PAL SINGH KOHLI Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Rajesh Mahna and Mr.Manu K.Giri, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA % 1. This appeal by the Revenue prays that the order dated 11.07.2014 of Income Tax Tribunal (ITAT) passed in appeal No.362/DEL/2013 respecting the respondent/assessee for the Assessment Year 2009-10 be set aside. The impugned order was passed by ITAT dismissing the appeal of the Revenue against the order dated 31.10.2012 rendered by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. allowing the appeal of the respondent/assessee thereby setting aside the order dated 28.11.2011 passed by the Assessing Officer (A.O) under Section 143(3) of Income Tax Act 1961 assessing the ITA22015 Page 1 incom...
Sh. Sharad Kumar Yadav Vs. The Chairman, Food Corporation of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.5497/2014 12th January, 2015 % SH. SHARAD KUMAR YADAV Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Gulshan Sharma, Advocate. VERSUS THE CHAIRMAN, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ...... Respondent Through: Ms. Anjna Masih, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Counsel for the petitioner prays for more time for filing the rejoinder affidavit. In my opinion petitioner has already had time from 15.12.2014 to file the rejoinder affidavit and thus he need not be given further opportunity, especially in the facts of the present case which show that the petitioner not only with the main petition should have filed the application filed by him seeking appointment alongwith connected documents, it is otherwise also borne out from the record that the petitioner alongwith his application seeking appointment never gave the requisite documents showing his practice as an Advocate for th...
Sushila Devi Vs. Directorate of Education and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No.2123/2012 12th January , 2015 SUSHILA DEVI Through: ......Petitioner Mr. O.S.Soran, Adv. VERSUS DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Yogesh Saini, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Adv. for R-2. Ms. Priyabrat Sahu, proxy counsel for R3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner for quashing of the appointment of respondent no.3 as the Physical Education Teacher in the respondent no.2-school in terms of the Selection Committee Meeting dated 17.3.2012. The case of the petitioner is that she was a better candidate for being appointed as a Physical Education Teacher and not the respondent no.3. In the writ petition it is also alleged that the selection of the respondent no.3 is vitiated because the father of the respond...
Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sajjan Lal and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:12. h January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 603/2013 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through Ms. Arpan Wadhawan, Advocate for Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa, Advocate versus SAJJAN LAL & ORS. Through ..... Respondents Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL G.P. MITTAL, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 01.05.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby while awarding the compensation of Rs.36,341/- in favour of Respondent no.1. Sajjan Lal for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 17.07.2009, the Claims Tribunal declined to grant any recovery rights to the Appellant on the ground that since the driver possess a driving licence to drive LMV (NonTransport), yet by driving a Light Goods Vehicle (LGV) which is also a Light Motor Vehicle (LMV), the insured cannot be said to have breached the terms of the insurance policy.2. The relevant ob...
New Delhi Tele Tech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/S. Cisco Systems Capital (India) P ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:9. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:12th January, 2015 % + CRL. M.C. 4688/2014 NEW DELHI TELE TECH PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Choudhary with Mr. Raghu Vashisht, Advocates. versus M/S. CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Punit Kumar Bhalla with Ms. Chetna Bhalla and Ms. Isha Abrol, Advocates. + CRL. M.C. 4690/2014 NEW DELHI TELE TECH PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Choudhary with Mr. Raghu Vashisht, Advocates. versus M/S. CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Punit Kumar Bhalla with Ms. Chetna Bhalla and Ms. Isha Abrol, Advocates. + CRL. M.C. 4692/2014 NEW DELHI TELE TECH PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Choudhary with Mr. Raghu Vashisht, Advocates. versus M/S. CISCO SYSTEMS CAPITAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Through: .....Respondents Mr. Punit Kumar Bhalla with Ms. Chetna Bhalla and Ms. Isha Abrol, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JU...
Gudia and Ors. Vs. Mukesh and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2015
$ -5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:12. h January, 2015 + MAC.APP. 234/2010 GUDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Appellants Mr.O.P. Mannie, Advocate Through: ..... Respondents Advocate (presence not given) versus MUKESH & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appellants seek enhancement of compensation of Rs.5,83,000/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) for the death of Hem Raj who succumbed to fatal injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 24.07.2007 at about 11:15 p.m. near Mukarba Chowk, G.T. Road, Delhi.2. In the absence of any appeal by the Insurance Company or the owner and driver of the vehicle, finding on negligence reached by the Claims Tribunal has attained finality.3. A very short submission is raised by Mr. O.P. Mannie, the learned counsel for the Appellants. It is urged that the deceased was a self-employed person and was earning Rs.8,000/- per month at...
Cit Vs. Amarson Watch Co.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2015
$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:12. 01.2015 + ITA5402012 CIT Through: ..... Appellant Sh. Abhishek Baghel and Sh. Angad Sandhu, Advocates. versus AMARSON WATCH CO. Through: ..... Respondent None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA % 1. This Income Tax Appeal under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act is directed against the order dated 25.10.2011 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in income tax appeal No.440/Del/2010 before the said authority. Vide the said order, the ITAT rejected the appeal of the Revenue confirming the order of CIT (A) passed on 25.10.2011 in appeal No.293/2008-09.2. The appeal before the CIT (A) had been preferred by the respondent assessee impugning the order dated 31.12.2008 passed by the Assessing Officer rejecting the books of accounts under Section 145 of Income Tax Act, assessing the income for assessment year 2006-2007 at 42,19,790/- ITA5402012 Page 1 concluding, inter ali...
- ‹ Prev
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- Next ›
- Last »