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.
Mohit Kumar Vs. Vimal Dhasmana and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 3645/2014 & I.As. 23766-23767/2014 MOHIT KUMAR ..... Plaintiff Through: Plaintiff in person. versus VIMAL DHASMANA AND ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, Advocate with Mr. Ekansh Agarwal, Advocate. Reserved on :28. h January, 2015 Date of Decision :02. d February, 2015. % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J:1. Mr.Sanjeev Agarwal, learned counsel entered appearance on behalf of the defendants. He stated that the plaintiff who appears in person, is in the habit of filing false and frivolous litigations just to delay the disposal of various proceedings pending at final stages in the District Courts.2. Mr. Agarwal stated that the suit property namely, 704, Sarvpriya Apartment, Sarvpriya Vihar, New Delhi is registered in the name of Mr. H.H. Swami Rama, the founder President of a Registered Society Himalayan Institute Hospital Trust. He further stated that there is a registered Will dated 09th April, ...
Mukesh Kumar Vs. The State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY02 2015 + CRL. A. 883/2004 MUKESH KUMAR Through : ..... Appellant. Mr. R.P. Shukla with Mr.R.K.Sonaki and Mr.Dhanajay Singh, Advocates along with appellant in person. versus THE STATE ..... Respondent Through : Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for State. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. The appellant-Mukesh Kumar impugns a judgment dated 16.10.2004 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.24/2002 arising out of FIR No.11/2002 registered at Police Station Vasant Kunj by which he was held guilty for committing offence under Section 376 IPC. By an order dated 23.10.2004, he was awarded RI for seven years with fine `4,000/-.2. Allegations against the appellant as reflected in the charge- sheet were that on 06.01.2002 he kidnapped the prosecutrix X (assumed name) aged about 16 years from the lawful guardianship of her parents without their consent and sexually assaulted her thereafter. Daily Dairy (D...
Om Shivay Enterprises Vs. The Chief Commissioner of Customs and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2015
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2512/2014 and CM No.5213/2014 (directions) OM SHIVAY ENTERPRISES ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Bhagabati Prasad Padhy, Advocate versus THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS ...... Respondents Through: Ms. Sonia Sharma, Sr. Standing Counsel for R-1 & 2 Mr. Sanjeev Narula, CGSC with Mr. Ajay Kalra, Advocate for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER0202.2015 % 1. The limited grievance of the petitioner is that, its goods are not being cleared, based on an erroneous view of the respondents that they are in the nature of E-waste and thus qualify as hazardous waste. The grievance is set forth in the background of the following brief facts.2. The petitioner has imported into the country second hand multifunctional copier machines (Plus A-3 size) (in short collectively referred to as the machines). 2.1 The import of the said machines was made by the petitioner on 05.12.2013. The petitioner avers that it has obtained a Char...
Ram Sumiran Pal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment pronounced on : February 02, 2015 Crl. M (Bail) No.1174/2014 in BAIL APPLN. 1272/2014 RAM SUMIRAN PAL Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Anjani Kumar Singh, Adv., Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. and Mr. Manish Kumar, Advs. versus STATE Through ..... Respondent Mr. M.N. Dudeja, APP for State CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. This is an application under Section 439 read with Section 482 CrPC for interim bail. The petitioner has been facing trial in a case registered pursuant to the FIR No.198/2013 under Section 420/406/120B IPC at Police Station, Crime Branch, Delhi on complaint of one Rambir Sharma.2. On the basis of complaint the FIR was registered on 29th November, 2013. The contents of the FIR read as under :he is residing with his family since 1988 and is running Auto Parts business factory, which was earlier in Jhandenwalan and after that shifted to Rai Haryana. In 2006-07 I incurred big loss in the factory and due ...
Pradeep Singh Jadon Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2015
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7863/2013 PRADEEP SINGH JADON ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Vaibhav Sharma and Mr. Ajayraj Singh, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC with Mr. Krishanu Barua, Advocate for R-1 Mr. R.V. Sinha, Standing Counsel for R-2/CBI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER0202.2015 % 1. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. On the last date, Mr. Mahajan had sought time to obtain instructions in the matter. Mr. Mahajan says that since, counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.1, he has received the instructions to resist the petition. 2.1 Mr. Sinha who appears for the CBI submits likewise.3. I had sketched out the controversy in my previous order dated 12.01.2015. I do not intend to repeat the same. The relevant extract, that is, paragraphs 12 to 17 of that order, are set out hereinbelow, for the sake of convenience :12. Briefly the case of the petitione...
Rajender Jaina Vs. National Federation of the Blind and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2015
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA4962005 Date of decision:2. d February, 2015 % RAJENDER JAINA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Rajesh Aggarwal, Mr. Santosh Srivastava, Advs. along with appellant in person. versus NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. S.K. Rungta, respondent no.2 in person. SI Bishambar Dayal, P.S. Connaught Place. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT(ORAL) 1. The appellant has challenged the impugned judgment and decree of the Trial Court whereby a suit for recovery of damages of Rs.5,00,000/- has been dismissed by the learned Trial Court.2. Respondent no.2 who is also representing respondent no.1 as its General Secretary submits that on 29th May, 1989, the appellant approached the respondents for full and final settlement. The terms of the settlement are recorded in the letter dated 29th May, 1989 which is reproduced hereunder:Er. RAJENDER JAINA Chartered Civil Engineer Award Winner of 1982, 1983, 1984 & 1985 ...
Shamsher Gujjar @ Choudhary Vs. Sartaj Hotel Apartments and Villas Pvt ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ARB.P. 163/2013 with I.A. Nos. 11925/2013, 7867/2014, and 14174/2014 SHAMSHER GUJJAR @ CHOUDHARY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manish Gandhi, Mr. Ravi Kumar and Mr. Manish Kr. Singh, Advocates. versus SARTAJ HOTEL APARTMENTS AND VILLAS PVT LTD & OTHERS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kr. Atreya with Mr. Munish Kr. Mahendra and Mr. Ajay Wadhera, Advocates. AND O.M.P. 1047/2012 with I.A. 17526/2013, 12632/2014, 12913/2014, 484 of 2015 and CRL. M.A. 9066 of 2013 and CCP(OS) 59 of 2013 SHAMSHER GUJJAR @ CHOUDHARY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manish Gandhi, Mr. Ravi Kumar and Mr. Manish Kr. Singh, Advocates. versus SARTAJ HOTEL APARTMENTS AND VILLAS PVT LTD & OTHERS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kr. Atreya with Mr. Munish Kr. Mahendra and Mr. Ajay Wadhera, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR ORDER0202.2015 1. Arb. P. No.163 of 2013 is a petition under Section 1...
Sanjeev Mittal Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2015
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:02. d February, 2015 + ITA5202014 SANJEEV MITTAL Through ..... Appellant Dr. Rakesh Gupta and Mr. Mukul Mathur, Advs. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through Mr. Rohit Madan and Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The assessee is aggrieved by the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the ITAT) to the extent that it remitted the case for reconsideration by the Assessing Officer (AO) on the assumption that additional evidence had been filed, or was sought to be led by the assessee. The question sought to be urged is whether in the circumstances of the case the nature of the remand ought to have been limited, given that the CIT(Appeals) considered all materials on record and held that the sum of 1,97,17,460/-, reported during assessment year 200708, constituted capital gai...
Mrs. Ritu Bhatia Vs. Ministry of Civil Supplies, Consumer Affairs, and
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.977/2015 2nd February, 2015 % MRS. RITU BHATIA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Shameet Mukherjee, Senior Advocate with Mr. O.P. Aggarwal, Advocate. Versus MINISTRY OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION & OTHERS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Saurav Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner impugns the order of the respondent no.2/employer dated 2.1.2015 terminating the services of the petitioner on the ground that her initial appointment itself was flawed because petitioner who was required to have five years experience as a Company Secretary as on 30.11.2013 did not have the necessary experience of five years. The impugned order dated 2.1.2015 reads as under:MEMORANDUM Whereas, online applications from elig...
Noida Mint Employees Union and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.3617/2014 2nd February, 2015 % NOIDA MINT EMPLOYEES UNION & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Barun Kumar Sinha, Advocate with Mrs. Pratibha Sinha, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Meera Bhatia, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. R.N. Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Petitioner nos.2 to 9 in this writ petition are the employees of the respondent no.2/Security Printing & Minting Corporation of India Ltd. (SPMCIL). These petitioners are admittedly posted and thus working with the respondent no.2 at respondent no.3 i.e the unit of the respondent no.2 at Noida, U.P. Petitioners, by this writ petition, seek directions for the members of the petitioner no.1/Union WP(C) 3617/2014 Assistant Grade III Technical (W-1) with the grade pay of Rs.1,900/- instead of Rs.1,800/-.2. As stated above...
- ‹ Prev
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 62
- Next ›
- Last »