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.
Rajesh Yadav and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : January 29, 2015 Judgment Delivered on : February 05, 2015 + W.P.(C) 7882/2014 RAJESH YADAV & ORS. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Col.S.R.Kalkal, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Vivek Goyal, CGSC with Mr.M.Tapan Sharma, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The policy for posting Junior Commissioned Officers of the Indian Army to HQ Indian Military Training Team (HQ IMTRAT) is governed by AEC ROI062006 and Integrated Headquarters of Ministry of Defence/SD/3 (UN & TT) Service Note No.83079/QR/SD-3 (UN & TT) dated April 12, 1999.2. As per the policy, the Junior Commissioned Officers must have successfully completed a Map Craft Instructor Course Serial No.-155 and should have undergone Dzongkha Language Course Ser-32. Concededly the petitioners have successfully completed the two courses. Posting to HZ IMT...
J.C.Thind Vs. Uoi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : January 27, 2015 Judgment Delivered on : February 05, 2015 + W.P.(C) 838/2012 J.C.THIND Represented by: .....Petitioner Mr.Ankur Chhibber, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. Represented by: .....Respondents Mr.Anurag Ahluwalia, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The writ petitioner prays to this Court that order dated January 24, 2011 upholding the penalty of reduction of lower time scale of pay for a period of three years inflicted upon the petitioner be quashed and a mandamus be issued to the respondents to open the sealed cover(s) in respect of recommendation made by the DPC qua the petitioner which met on November 12, 2005 and March 13, 2006 and to give effect to the same with all consequential benefits. The order in question dated January 24, 2011 directs that the penalty levied upon the petitioner shall be effective from July 29, 2010 i.e. from t...
Sandeep Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 1377/2011 Judgment reserved on 12th January, 2015 Judgment pronounced on 5th February, 2015 % Appellant Through: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate SANDEEP STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Respondent Through: Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP for the State. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G. S. SISTANI, J1 Present appeal filed by the appellant under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment of the trial court dated 28.07.2011 and order of sentence dated 30.07.2011 whereby the appellant had been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 20,000/- for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.2. Brief facts of the case, as noted by the Learned Trial Court are:1) According to the prosecution case accused Sandeep was married to Sumitra (deceased), sister of the compl...
Raj Karan (Deceased) Through: Lrs Sh. Ganga Ram Vs. M/S. All India Wom ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: February 5, 2015 + W.P.(C) No.2239/2013 RAJ KARAN (DECEASED) THROUGH: LRS SH. GANGA RAM ..... Petitioner Represented by: Ms. Deepali Gupta, Advocate. Versus M/S. ALL INDIA WOMENS CONFERENCE ..... Respondent Represented by: Mrs. C.M. Chopra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sunil Mittal, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. The present petition is directed against the award dated 24.03.2012, wherein the learned Tribunal had recorded that by leading cogent and trustworthy evidence, the respondent Management has proved the absenteeism and misconduct of the petitioner/workman deceased Raj Karan for a long period. Accordingly, the learned Tribunal held that order of dismissal from service dated 16.04.1999 of the petitioner/workman was justified and legal.2. The present petition has been filed through legal heir of deceased Raj Karan, who was a protected workman, filed I.D. No.483/1998 later renumbered a...
Taj Televisoin India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Fastway Transmission India Pvt. Ltd ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:05. 02.2015 + WP(C) 1208/2015 TAJ TELEVISOIN INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... PETITIONER VERSUS FASTWAY TRANSMISSION INDIA PVT. LTD. & ANR. ..... RESPONDENT Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner :Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr Tejveer Singh Bhatia, Mr Kapil Midha & Mr Kunal Vats, Advs. For the Respondents: Mr Navin Chawla & Mr G.S. Oberoi, Advs. for R-1. Mr Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr T.P. Singh, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER,J WP(C) No.1208/2015 & CM Nos. 2120-2122/2015 1. This petition is directed against an interim order dated 29.01.2015 passed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal (in short the Tribunal) in petition No.530(C)/2014, in M.A. No.265/ 2014, filed in, petition No.371(C)/2014, along with M.A. No.230/2014, and in M.A. No.284/2014, filed in, petition No.358(C)/2014. 1.1 The reason, I have detailed out the petition numbers, is on account ...
Kuldip Kaur Vs. Smt Surinder Kaur
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2015
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:5. h February, 2015 + CONT.CAS(C) No.795/2013 KULDIP KAUR Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Anil Sapra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Suman Malhotra, Advocate. Versus SMT SURINDER KAUR Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr. Mahesh K. Chaudhary, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks directions to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondent for not complying with the order dated 24.07.1984 passed by the learned District Judge, Delhi, in Probate Case No.244/1981, titled as Smt. Surinder Kaur Vs. State & Ors. 2. The respondent has filed counter-affidavit to the instant petition, wherein stated that she was not aware of the facts. She is an issueless widow, whose husband had expired long ago on 06.12.1980 and she had been living all alone in the suit property at that time.3. It is further stated that Shri Rakesh Kumar Mittal and his wife Mrs....
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S Kuber Mutual Benefit Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2015
$~51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:05. h February, 2015 + ITA962006 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Mr. N P Sahni, sr. standing counsel with Mr. Nitin Gulati, Adv. versus M/S KUBER MUTUAL BENEFIT LTD. ..... Respondent Through None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The substantial question of law stated to be urged is whether the ITATs conclusions with respect to the applicability of the provisions of Interest Tax Act were erroneous?.2. The assessee, at the relevant time, was carrying on financial business which included accepting deposits as a mutual benefit fund company. It also used to lend money and, for that purpose, charged from its borrowers certain amounts under different heads which included financing charges. The AO was of the opinion for assessment year 1996-97, that the amount claimed as processing charges was in fact interest, and liable to be tr...
Sh. Dharampal Vs. M/S North Delhi Power Ltd. Through Its Md
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.1865/2001 5th February, 2015 % SH. DHARAMPAL Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajiv Gupta, Advocate. versus M/S NORTH DELHI POWER LTD. THROUGH ITS MD ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Vikram Nandrajog with Mr.Sushil Jaswal, Advocates. 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 and 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner, erstwhile employee of the Delhi Vidyut Board (now Tata Power Delhi Distribution Limited), impugning the departmental proceedings against him whereby the Disciplinary Authority vide its order dated 24.3.2000 imposed the major penalty of reduction by five stages in his present scale of pay for a period of five years with further stipulation that during the period of reduction he will not earn any increments of pay and on expiry of this period the reduction will have the effect of postponing his future ...
M/S Aishwarya Financial Services Pvt Ltd and Anr Vs. Future Value Reta ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on January 28, 2015 Judgment Delivered on February 05, 2015 + ARB.P. 364/2012 M/S AISHWARYA FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT LTD & ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Ajay Kumar Gupta, Adv. versus FUTURE VALUE RETAIL LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Sudhir K. Makkar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.This petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act (Act for short) for appointment of arbitrator, wherein the facts are, a lease agreement dated December 18, 2007 was executed between M/s Pantaloon Retail (India) Ltd. (now Future Value Retail Ltd., the respondent herein) and M/s Majestic Properties Pvt. Ltd. (erstwhile owner) for a period of 9 years with a 5 year lock-in period where neither party could terminate the lease agreement. The premises are the Lower Ground & Ground Floor in a Mall named Melange, The Mall bearing No.C-8/9/14, Pocket T, Pallavpuram, Phase...
M/S Multitech Construction Co. Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on January 29, 2015 Judgment Delivered on February 05, 2015 + O.M.P. 612/2012 M/S MULTITECH CONSTRUCTION CO. Through: .... Petitioner Mr.Sandeep Sharma, Advocate Ms.Risha Mittal, Advocate with versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI Through: ..... Respondent Ms.Anjana Gosain, Advocate Mr.Pradeep Desodya, Advocate with CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.1. The present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act in short) impugns the award dated March 20, 2012 passed by the Sole Arbitrator whereby the Sole Arbitrator, has, awarded Rs. 1 lakh (against claim No.1) Rs.8856/- as bank charges (against claim no.2.3) and simple interest @ 2.25% p.a. on Rs.7,32,128/- for the period between July 16, 2009 to June 29, 2010 (against claim No.2.4) pendente lite interest at 9% on Rs. 8856/- and future interest @ 12% on Rs.1,08,856/- (against claim No.4) apart from granting cost of Rs.10,000/- (ag...
- ‹ Prev
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- Next ›
- Last »