Delhi Court February 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.
Vikram Kaushik and Anr Vs. Vivek Kaushik
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on :03.02.2015 Judgment delivered on :10.02.2015 CS(OS) 1848/2009 + CS(OS) 1848/2009 VIKRAM KAUSHIK AND ANR Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr. Sunil Aggarwal and Mr. Arjun Mitra, Advs. versus VIVEK KAUSHIK ..... Defendant Through Mr. Joydeep Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 The present suit is a suit for partition. It has been filed by the plaintiffs Vikram Kaushik and Jyotsna Kaushik. Defendant Kaushik is their brother. Vivek The immovable properties which are the subject matter of the present suit are - (i) L-19, Lajpat Nagar-III, Delhi-110024; (ii) Flat No.1402, Marathon Galaxy-I, L.B.S. Marg, Mulund, Mumbai and (iii) Agricultural land in two pieces comprising of about 10 acres each in village and post office Shedawan, District Bulandshahar, Uttar Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the suit property). 2 The parties to the suit are legal heirs of deceased Hem Chandra Kaushik who had die...
Krishan Kumar Vs. State Bank of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~44 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:10. 02.2015 + W.P.(C) 1286/2015, C.M. NO.2282/2015 & 2283/2015 KRISHAN KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. Rajeeve Mehra, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Alok. K. Agarwal and Sh. S. Kaushik, Advocates. versus STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Sh. P. Gowtham, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. Issue notice. Sh. P. Gowtham, Advocate accepts notice. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter was heard finally.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) dismissing his appeal preferred against an order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) dated 03.10.2007. The respondents (hereafter referred to as the SBI) had preferred an application (O.A. No.375/2000) under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereafter referred to as the R...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ramesh Suri
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:10. h February, 2015 + ITR172002 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Balbir Singh, sr. standing counsel with Ms. Rubal Maini, Adv. versus RAMESH SURI Through ..... Respondent Mr. Prakash Kumar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The following reference has been received under the erstwhile Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act. It is agreed that the question of law which this Court has to answer is Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the amount of US Dollors 16000 equivalent to 1,84,860/- received from Arjun C. Waney was in the nature of gift in the hands of Shri Ramesh Suri and hence not taxable?. The undisputed facts are that one Mr. Arjun C Waney settled in United States, gifted an aggregate of $3 lakhs vide a letter dated 10.1.1984 to one Sh. Ashwa...
Jai Tuteja and Ors. Vs. State and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:10. h February, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 3553/2013 & Crl. M.A. No.12970/2013 JAI TUTEJA & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Ajay Burman with Mr. Karan Burman and Mr. Karan Sidhu, Advocates versus STATE & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Vinod Diwakar, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with ASI Rajpal Mr. Gurmehar Sistani, Advocate with Respondent No.2 & 3 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.577/2012 under Sections 186/353/34 of IPC registered at police station Mehrauli, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavits of respondents No.2 and 3. Mr. Diwakar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits that respondent No.2 Niranjan Singh Kasana and Respondent No.3 Rahul Sharma are the complainant party of this FIR. It is noted in the order of 2nd September, 2013 that respondent No.2 and 3 had appeared in person in court and given no objection to the quashin...
Cit-Xi Vs. Zohra Emporium
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:10. h February, 2015 + ITA2342014 CIT-XI Through ..... Appellant Mr. N P Sahni, sr. standing counsel with Mr. Nitin Gulati and Mr. Judy James, Advs. versus ZOHRA EMPORIUM Through ..... Respondent Mr. Piyush Kaushik, Adv. 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 an order dated 18.10.2013 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the ITAT) in ITA No.3862/Del./2000. It urges three issues and states that they involve substantial questions of law, first, on the deletion of addition relatable to unrecorded purchases (83,25,768/-); rejection of the sum of 16,85,743/-, which had been added originally by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of the gross profit rate adopted by him); and on the deletion of addition of 87,429/-, claimed by the assessee as expenses towards embroidery charges. Briefly, the facts ...
M/S Jia Lal Malhotra and Co Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7900/2014 and CM No.18508/2014 (stay) M/S JIA LAL MALHOTRA & CO ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Anusuya Salwan and Mr. Kunal Kohli, Advocates versus % UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Suparna Srivastava, CGSC with Mr. Kumar Harsh and Ms. Nishtha Sikroria, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER1002.2015 1. Briefly, the grievance of the petitioner is that its request for revalidation of enlistment as a Class-II contractor has not been considered fairly.2. I must only note that this is a second round of litigation initiated by the petitioner, which had in the earlier round, come to the court assailing, broadly, the provisions of Rule 19 of the Rules of Enlistment of Contractors in Central Public Works Department, 2005 (in short 2005 Rules). 2.1 This challenge was laid by the petitioner via a writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution; which was numbered as : WP(C) 5028/2012. 2.2 Fortunatel...
Surender Singh Vs. Madura Coats Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 10, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 2130/2013 & Crl.M.A. 8286/2013 SURENDER SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sudhir Naagar and Mr. Mohit Singh, Advocates versus MADURA COATS PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. A.P. Vinod, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of criminal complaint No.758/1/2012, under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 titled M/s. Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Schifflies India Ltd. is sought on merits in this petition. At the hearing, it was disclosed by learned counsel for petitioner that Notice under Section 251 of Cr.P.C. has not yet been framed and the next date before trial court is 18th March, 2015. At the outset, it is made clear that learned counsel for petitioner has not been heard on merits. Since petitioner has an alternate and efficacious remedy available to him to urge the pleas taken herein before trial court at the time of framing of Notice...
Deepak and Anr Vs. Maya Devi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 64/2015 Decided on:10. h February, 2015 % DEEPAK & ANR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Singh and Mr. Baljeet Singh, Advocates. versus MAYA DEVI & ORS Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA ..... Respondents MUKTA GUPTA, J (ORAL) CM No.2367/2015 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. RC.REV. 64/2015 and CM No.2366/2015 (stay) 1. Aggrieved by the order dated 2nd September, 2014 the Petitioner has preferred the present petition whereby his leave to defend application in an eviction petition under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short the DRC Act) filed by the Respondents was dismissed.2. In the eviction petition the Respondents pleaded that a shop measuring 10ft x 7.6 ft on the ground floor in Premises No.1656, Gali No.119, Shanti Nagar, Tri Nagar, Delhi-110035 was let out to Mahender Nath, father of the Petitioners at a monthly rent of Rs. 1,200/- per month since the...
Arvind Kumar@vikram and Ors Vs. The State of Nct of Delhi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:10. h February, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 4879/2013 ARVIND KUMAR @ VIKRAM & ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Sushant Mukund, Advocate versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with Inspector Vijay, SHO, New Ashok Nagar Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % JUDGMENT (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.08/1999 under Sections 448/457/420/468/ 471/427/120-B of IPC registered at police station New Ashok Nagar, Delhi is sought in this petition. The petitioners have been put on trial for the offences under Section 427 and 457 of IPC only although the FIR was registered in this case for the offences of forgery, etc also. Quashing of aforesaid FIR and proceedings arising therefrom is sought on the basis of settlement and compromise which took place in the year 2011 but the said compromise was finalized in September, 2013. Mr. Navin Sharma, l...
Om Parkash and Anr. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY10 2015 + (1) CRL.A. 408/2002 OM PARKASH & ANR. ..... Appellants Through : Mr.Pawan Madan, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP. Mr.Ram Bhawn Singh, Mr.Sudhir Singh, Ms.Sushila Devi and Ms.Ishwanti, Complainants present in person. ASI Rajpal Singh, PS Mehrauli. + (2) CRL.A. 423/2002 MAHENDER SINGH DAHIYA & ORS. ..... Appellants Through : Mr.N.Hariharan, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Sanjay Sood and Mr.Vaibhav Sharma, Advocates. versus STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP. Mr.Ram Bhawn Singh, Mr.Sudhir Singh, Ms.Sushila Devi and Ms.Ishwanti, Complainants present in person. ASI Rajpal Singh, PS Mehrauli. + (3) CRL.A. 409/2002 NARENDER & ANR. ..... Appellants Through : Mr.Mahinder Singh, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP. Mr.Ram Bhawn Singh, Mr.Sudhir Singh, Ms.Sushila Devi and Ms.Ishwanti, Complainants present in person. ASI Rajpal Singh, P...
- ‹ Prev
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- Next ›
- Last »