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.
Manju Saxena Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Reserved on: January 28, 2015 Judgment Delivered on: February 03, 2015 CM No.10514/2014 & CM No.11642/2014 in LPA5502012 HONGKONG & SHANGHAI ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Sr.Advocate, Mr.J.P.Cama, Sr.Advocate and Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Sayed Naqvi, Ms.Namrata Kapoor, Mr.P.P.Kanwer and Mr.Deepesh, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr.Jitendra Triptahi, Advocate for R-1 R-2 in person LPA2272013 & CM No.6214/2013, CM No.7395/2013, CM No.8690/2013, CM No.10681/2013, CM No.2024/2014, CM No.9600/2014, CM No.12578/2014, CM No.19192/2014 & CM No.20214/2014 MANJU SAXENA Represented by: ..... Appellant Appellant in person versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Represented by: LPA No.550/2012 & LPA No.227/2013 ..... Respondents Mr.Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr.Jitendra Triptahi, Advocate for R-1 Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Sr.Advocate, Mr.J.P.C...
Hongkong and Shanghai Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Reserved on: January 28, 2015 Judgment Delivered on: February 03, 2015 CM No.10514/2014 & CM No.11642/2014 in LPA5502012 HONGKONG & SHANGHAI ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Sr.Advocate, Mr.J.P.Cama, Sr.Advocate and Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Sayed Naqvi, Ms.Namrata Kapoor, Mr.P.P.Kanwer and Mr.Deepesh, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr.Jitendra Triptahi, Advocate for R-1 R-2 in person LPA2272013 & CM No.6214/2013, CM No.7395/2013, CM No.8690/2013, CM No.10681/2013, CM No.2024/2014, CM No.9600/2014, CM No.12578/2014, CM No.19192/2014 & CM No.20214/2014 MANJU SAXENA Represented by: ..... Appellant Appellant in person versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Represented by: LPA No.550/2012 & LPA No.227/2013 ..... Respondents Mr.Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr.Jitendra Triptahi, Advocate for R-1 Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Sr.Advocate, Mr.J.P.C...
Prince Kumar and Ors. Vs. The Institute of Company Secretaries of Indi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7262/2014 Pronounced on:03. 02.2015 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Anil Sapra, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Tarun Kumar Tiwari, Mr.Mukesh Sukhija, Ms.Rupali Kapoor, Advs. PRINCE KUMAR & ORS. Versus THE INSTITUTE OF COMPANY SECRETARIES OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr.Adv. with Mr.R.D.Makheeja, Adv. for R-1. Ms.Monika Arora, CGSC with Mr.Abhishek Choudhary, Mr.Rajeev Kumar Yadav, Advs. for R-2/UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW JUDGMENT : Ms.G.ROHINI, CJ1 The petitioners claim to be the registered Associate Members of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India (hereinafter referred to as the Institute) constituted under the Company Secretaries Act, 1980.2. This petition is filed with a prayer to quash Regulation 114 of the Company Secretaries Regulations, 1982 read with Rule 7 of the Company Secretaries (Election to the Council) Rules, 2006 declaring the same as arbitrary, ...
Raj Kachroo Vs. Edcil (India) Ltd. and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-2015
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:3. d February, 2015 % + W.P.(C) No.581/2015 RAJ KACHROO ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person. Versus EdCIL (INDIA) LTD. & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Shiva Lakshmi, CGSC with Mr. Rahul Chouhan, Adv. CORAM:HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as a Public Interest Litigation, pleading, (i) that the respondent no.1 is a Company owned by the Government of India; (ii) that the methodology used by the respondent no.1 with regard to booking of revenue in its annual accounts is incorrect; (iii) as a result of the said incorrectness, funds belonging to the Government of India which would ordinarily be audited by Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) for Value For Money are treated as funds belonging to respondent no.1 and in which capacity they are auditable by the respondent no...
Vikas Rana Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY03 2015 + BAIL APPLN. 2158/2014 VIKAS RANA ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Siddharth Aggarwal with Mr.Vaibhav Sethi, Mr.Vinayak Bhandari and Mr.Gaurav Kakkar, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP. Mr.G.Tushar Rao with Mr.Kumar Ranjan, Mr.A.Singla, Advocates for the complainant along with complainant present in person. + BAIL APPLN. 2256/2014 NAVEEN RANA ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Siddharth Aggarwal with Mr.Vaibhav Sethi, Mr.Vinayak Bhandari and Mr.Gaurav Kakkar, Advocates. versus STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Navin K.Jha, APP. Mr.G.Tushar Rao with Mr.Kumar Ranjan, Mr.A.Singla, Advocates for the complainant along with complainant present in person. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in Case FIR No.1558/2014 under Section 376/506/34 registered at Police Station Mehrauli. In her complaint, lodged on 30...
Naveen Rana Vs. State ( Govt of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY03 2015 + BAIL APPLN. 2158/2014 VIKAS RANA ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Siddharth Aggarwal with Mr.Vaibhav Sethi, Mr.Vinayak Bhandari and Mr.Gaurav Kakkar, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP. Mr.G.Tushar Rao with Mr.Kumar Ranjan, Mr.A.Singla, Advocates for the complainant along with complainant present in person. + BAIL APPLN. 2256/2014 NAVEEN RANA ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Siddharth Aggarwal with Mr.Vaibhav Sethi, Mr.Vinayak Bhandari and Mr.Gaurav Kakkar, Advocates. versus STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Navin K.Jha, APP. Mr.G.Tushar Rao with Mr.Kumar Ranjan, Mr.A.Singla, Advocates for the complainant along with complainant present in person. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in Case FIR No.1558/2014 under Section 376/506/34 registered at Police Station Mehrauli. In her complaint, lodged on 30...
Harvinder Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:18. h November, 2014 Date of Decision:3. d February, 2015 % + CRL.M.C.Nos. 2877/2014, 2932/2014, 2938/2014, 2977/2014, 2979/2014, 2995/2014, 3002/2014, 3006/2014, 3015/2014, 3023/2014, 3025/2014, 3031/2014, 3037/2014. HARVINDER SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. D.S. Kohli with Mr. T.D. Sharma and Mr. A.S. Anand, Advocates. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for the State with Inspector/ IO Arun Kumar. Mr. Mohit Mathur and Mr. Akhil Mittal Advocates for the complainants in Crl. M.C. Nos.2977/2014, 2995/2014, 3023/2014 & 3037/2014. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH JUDGMENT1 By way of these thirteen petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), the petitioner seeks to set aside the order dated 03.06.2013, passed by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-II, Patiala House Court, New Delhi, as well as quashing of charge shee...
M/S Saini Constructions Company Vs. Delhi Jal Board
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on :22. 01.2015. Judgment delivered on :03. 02.2015. CS(OS) 800/2009 M/S SAINI CONSTRUCTIONS COMPANY Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.R.Rajappan and Ms.Rajasree Ajay, Advocates. versus DELHI JAL BOARD Through ..... Defendants Mr.Suresh Tripathi, Advocate for DJB. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 M/s Saini Construction Company (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) has filed the present suit seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.66,72,626/- along with pendente lite and future interest calculated at the rate of 15% per annum beside costs. Out of the sum of Rs.66,72,626/-, the principle figure is of Rs.51,32,789/- with interest calculated at the rate of 15% per annum which accumulates to Rs.15,39,837/-. The contention of the plaintiff is that the penalty amount of Rs.17,58,033.90, earnest money of Rs.7,73,000/- and the performance guarantee of Rs.9,76,700/- was illegally deducted from his final bill w...
Rattan Singh Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Punj Lloyd Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ARB.P. 541/2014 RATTAN SINGH BUILDERS PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Prabhjit Jauhar with Ms. Anupama Kaul, Advocates. versus PUNJ LLOYD LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. J.P. Sengh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Divyam Agarwal and Ms. Ritika Kohli, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER0302.2015 1. This is a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.2. The Petitioner and the Respondent entered into an agreement dated 6th April 2010 whereby the Respondent appointed Petitioner as contractor to execute the civil and plumbing works for construction of the proposed land system facility at Malanpur, District Bhind (Madhya Pradesh). The value of the work was Rs. 21,62,00,000 (Rupees Twenty One Crores, Sixty Two Lakhs only). The contract was modified by a letter dated 6th April 2010 which formed part and parcel of the a...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-Viii, New Delhi Vs. M/S. Muthoot Fin ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on November 13, 2014 Judgment delivered on February 03, 2015 + ITA3362002 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-VIII, NEW DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Rohit Madan,Sr.Standing Counsel with Mr.Akash Vajpai, Advocate versus M/S. MUTHOOT FINANCIERS, NEW DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Rajat Navei, Advocate with Mr.Kushagra Pandit, Advocate + ITA3382002 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI VIII ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Rohit Madan,Sr.Standing Counsel with Mr.Akash Vajpai, Advocate versus M/S. MUTHOOT FINANCIERS, NEW DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Rajat Navei, Advocate with Mr.Kushagra Pandit, Advocate ITA3412002 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Rohit Madan,Sr.Standing Counsel with Mr.Akash Vajpai, Advocate versus + M/S. MUTHOOT M. GEORGE BANKERS Through: ITA No.336/2002 & connected matters ..... Respondent Mr.Rajat Navei, Advocate Page 1 of 19 with Mr.Kushagra Pandit, Advocate + ITA3452002 COMMISSIONER...
- ‹ Prev
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- Next ›
- Last »