Delhi Court December 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.
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. Anuj Kumar Tyagi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
1. This is an appeal preferred against the judgment and decree dated 16.09.2013, passed by the learned Additional District Judge (In short the ADJ). By virtue of the impugned judgment, the appellant's suit for recovery has been dismissed on the sole ground that it is barred by limitation. 1.1 The learned ADJ has come to this conclusion based on a perusal of the statement of accounts (Ex. PW1/9) filed by the appellant, which is dated 31.10.2009. As per the said statement of account, the last transaction with the respondent took place on 11.08.2008. The learned ADJ thus, concluded, that since, the suit was filed on 20.07.2012, it was hopelessly barred by limitation. 1.2 Since the respondent, during the course of the proceedings, chose not to appear before the trial court, he was proceeded ex parte, after the appellant's witness had been partially cross-examined. 1.3 A perusal of the impugned judgment shows that the trial court has taken recourse to Section 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (...
Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-2 Vs. Bharti Overseas (P.) ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
S. Muralidhar, J. 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') is directed against the order dated 23rd March 2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('ITAT') in ITA No. 460/Del/2013. 2. The question sought to be urged before this Court is whether the ITAT was correct in affirming the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) ['CIT(A)'] which had confined the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act to Rs. 30,26,552 for the AY in question? 3. The incidental issue that is sought to be raised is whether the ITAT could read down Rule 8D (2)(ii) of the Income Tax Rules 1962 ('Rules'), and whether that was beyond the jurisdiction of the ITAT? 4. The Assessee Company was incorporated on 21st November 2005 as a service sector company engaged in the promotion of international telecom business and insurance business. For the AY 2008-09, the Assessee filed its original return of income on 19th September 2008 declaring loss of Rs.16,07,22,655. T...
Court on its Own Motion Vs. Seema Sapra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
Valmiki J. Mehta, J. 1. A Division Bench of this Court vide its Order dated 6.5.2014 issued contempt notice to Ms. Seema Sapra, writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.1280/2012. This Order dated 6.5.2014 passed by the Division Bench comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru reads as under:- Upon the Court assembling after lunch today, Ms. Seema Sapra presented herself and accused one of us (Vibhu Bakhru, J.) of corruption. Despite being cautioned, she persisted in leveling the same accusation. The context was constitution of Bench of Hon'ble Dr. Justice S. Muralidhar and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru which according to Ms. Sapra was done in an improper manner and, to use her own words, deceptively'. The Court was of the opinion, and continuous to maintain the said opinion, that the speech made by Ms. Seema Sapra amounts to criminal contempt in the face of the Court and is punishable under Section 14(1) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971. Accordin...
Punjab National Bank and Others Vs. Kingfisher Airlines Limited and Ot ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. 1. The Reserve Bank of India (RBI), from time to time, issued a number of Circulars to Banks and Financial Institutions (FIs), containing instructions on matters relating to wilful defaulters. To enable the Banks/FIs to have all the existing instructions on the subject at one place, a Master Circular dated 1st July, 2013, incorporating all the instructions/guidelines issued on cases of wilful default, was issued. The purpose thereof was defined as, to put in place a system to disseminate credit information pertaining to wilful defaulters for cautioning Banks/FIs so as to ensure that further bank finance is not made available to them. The said Circular inter alia provides for submission by Banks/Financial Institutions of data of wilful defaulters to RBI on a quarterly basis and preparation of a list of wilful defaulters by the RBI and communication thereof to the Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and to Credit Information Bureau (India) Ltd. (CIBIL). The s...
Madhur Eshwar Rao Basude and Others Vs. Medical Council of India and O ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
Jayant Nath, J. 1. By the present judgment, we shall dispose of all the aforesaid three Writ Petitions, namely W.P.(C) Nos.3414/2015, 4137/2015 and 3141/2015. All the three Writ Petitions seek directions to recognize postgraduate qualifications obtained from a Medical Institution outside India to enable them to have their postgraduate qualification entered into the State/Indian Medical Register. 2. In the present judgment, we have stated the facts of Writ Petition (C) No.3414/2015. 3. The said writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to the respondents, namely, the Medical Council of India and Union of India to conduct suitable screening test for citizens of India having postgraduate qualification from a medical institution outside India including the petitioners, so as to enable them to have their post-graduate qualifications entered in the State/Indian Medical Register. Other connected reliefs are also sought. 4. As per the petition, the petitioners are doctors with postgrad...
M/s. Superflo Pvt Ltd. Vs. M/s. Sandhyamani Associates (P) Ltd. and An ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
1. By way of this order, I propose to decide the above mentioned pending application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC. 2. The plaintiff has filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, dilution, unfair competition, rendition of accounts of profits, damages and delivery up against the defendants. 3. The facts of the case as per the plaint are that the plaintiff-Company was incorporated in the year 1986 who is also the registered proprietor of the trademark SUPERFLO which is also dominant and essential part of its company name who also started using the trademark from the very inception of the company in 1986. It is claimed that the plaintiff is engaged in the business of, inter alia, manufacturing sanitary ware accessories, bath room fittings and other allied products and it has the core competence of the plaintiff Company to manufacture products and scores of applications where control of flow of water is required,...
The State Vs. Ganga Ram
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2015
R.K. Gauba, J. 1. Upon cognizance being taken on the report under Section 173 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C), submitted on conclusion of investigation into FIR No. 272/2012 of Police Station Shahbad Dairy, the respondent herein stood trial in Sessions case No.91/2012 on the charge for offences punishable under Sections 363 and 376 (2)(f), 1860 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) on the allegations that on 11.08.2012 at about 8 am, he had kidnapped a girl child (PW-21) aged about 10 years, daughter of the first informant Dalip Kumar (PW-16) from near her house in Metro Vihar, Phase-I, Holambi Kalan, Delhi and thereafter committed rape upon her during the period from 11.08.2012 till 18.08.2012. By judgment dated 02.12.2014, the learned trial court held that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the respondent beyond reasonable doubts and, thus, acquitted him. 2. The State has brought this petition under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C praying for leave to appe...
Jai Balaji Security Services (Regd.) and Others Vs. A.P.F.C. Delhi (No ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2015
Pradeep Nandrajog, J. (Oral) CM No.29072/2015 in LPA No.868/2015 For the reasons stated in the application delay of 24 days in filing the appeal is condoned. LPA Nos.880/2015, 762/2015, 848/2015 and 868/2015 1. The above captioned four appeals are being disposed of by a composite order because a common question of law arises for consideration in the appeals. The appellants of LPA No.880/2015 had challenged an order passed under Section 14-B and Section 7-Q of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) before the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal. The order levied damages for late deposit of the provident fund dues and raised a demand towards interest. On an application filed for stay of the impugned demand, vide order dated September 21, 2015 the Appellate Tribunal directed that not more than 50% of the amount can be recovered. Said order was challenged by way of a writ petition which has been dismissed vide impug...
Hemant and Others Vs. State NCT of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2015
R.K. Gauba, J. 1. These seven criminal appeals, alongwith another (criminal appeal no.122/2012 ) were preferred to assail the judgment dated 29.04.2011 and order dated 30.04.2011, both passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma, Delhi in Sessions Case no.34/2008. The criminal appeal no. 122/2012 (preferred by Lalwati wife of Jagbir Singh) stood abated as the said appellant died on 03.01.2015. Since these appeals arise of the same set of facts, circumstances and prosecution, they have been heard together and are being decided through this common judgment. 2. Alka, daughter of Bachan Singh (PW2), was married to the appellant Hemant Singh (criminal appeal no.1023/2012) on 11.12.2005. She gave birth to a male child (named Mayank) in due course. On 28.09.2007, some 7/8 months after the birth of the child, sometime between 11:00 AM-12'o clock noon time, Alka (then aged 24 years) suffered burn-injuries in the matrimonial home i.e. house no.382, Gali no.1, Asha Ram Gali, within the juris...
Vijay Kumar Sethi Vs. Manak Chand and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2015
Open Court: 1. The present second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 18.08.2015 passed by the First Appellate Court, namely the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in RCA No.50/2014 preferred by the appellant/ defendant No.4 in the suit. The First Appellate Court has dismissed the said first appeal preferred by the appellant to assail the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, namely the learned Civil Judge, Delhi in Suit No.14/2004. By the said judgment, whereby the suit of the respondent No.1/ plaintiff was decreed. 2. Respondent No.1/ Sh. Manak Chand Jain, the original plaintiff had filed the said suit impleading his three brothers as defendants No.1 to 3, the appellant along with his two other brothers and sister as defendants No.4 to 7, Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking (DESU) as defendant No.8, and one Rajesh Kumar Khurana as defendant No.9 to seek the relief of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »