Delhi Court May 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.
Prakash G. Tahilramani (Since Deceased)through Sha Vs. Dda
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-18-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:18. h May, 2015 + W.P.(C) No.15188/2006 PRAKASH G. TAHILRAMANI (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH SHARDA BHAGAT ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. R.K.Saini and Ms. Aastha Chopra, Advocates. Versus DDA Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr. M.K.Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks directions thereby directing the respondent / DDA to calculate the cost of MIG Flat No.544, 3rd Floor, Pocket-A, Block-Phase 2, Sector-17, Dwarka, New Delhi, allotted to the petitioner as per the rates applicable on the date of first draw, i.e., 30.07.2003 and allow the petitioner to pay the cost of flat on cash down basis instead of hire purchase without reducing the amount of share money and service charges capitalised at item No.2 and 3 in the demand letter dated 25.01.2006.2. Facts in brief are that petitioner had booked an MIG Flat, under New Pattern Scheme, 1979 (HU...
Sasken Communication Technologies Limited Vs. Prime Telesystems Ltd. a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-18-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + EX.P. 16/2008 % Judgment reserved on 07.05.2015 Judgement pronounced on:18. 05.2015 SASKEN COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED ..... Decree Holder Through: Mr.Neeraj Sharma, Ms Marisha Shukla and Ms.Pragya Nalwa, Advocates Versus PRIME TELESYSTEMS LTD. & ORS. ..... Judgment Debtors Through: Mr Harish Malhotra, Sr. Advocate with Mr Lovkesh Sawhney, Adv for Judgment Debtor No.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT Ex.App.No.421/2015 in EX.P. 16/2008 1. In Execution Petition No.16/2008, an application No.817/2014 was moved by the Judgment Debtor No.2 to recall the orders dated 05.08.2014, passed by this Court. This application was assigned to this Court for disposal. It is also pertinent to mention here that the applicant had filed a EFA(OS) No.22/2014 before the Division Bench, challenging the order of this Court dated 05.08.2014, which was, however, dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to make an appropriate application before the le...
M/S R.K. Associates and Hoteliers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Indian Railways Cateri ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-18-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:18. h May, 2015 % + W.P.(C) 7095/2014 M/S R.K. ASSOCIATES & HOTELIERS PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manish Bishnoi and Mr. Jitender Kumar, Advocates. Versus INDIAN RAILWAYS CATERING & TOURISM CORPORATION (IRCTC) & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate with Mr. D.P.Pande, Mrs. Bhawana Pande, Mr. Rajesh Pande, Mr. Sourabh Gupta and Mr. S.J.Pandey, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.W.P.(C) 7095/2014 1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks directions thereby directing the respondent/Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation (for short IRCTC) to extend the existing catering licence of the petitioner for the operation and management of Quick Service Food Kiosk (for short QSFK) at Vijaywada Station upto 09.11.2016 in terms of Clause 3.1 of General Conditions of license as contained in the te...
Uoi Through the Secretary Ministry of Defence Vs. Shri Anil Kumar and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-18-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on 28.04.2015 % Judgment pronounced on:18. 05.2015 + W.P.(C) 16715/2006 & C.M. Nos. 18322/2012 & 20581/2014 UOI THROUGH THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF DEFENCE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Manish Mohan, Advocate alongwith Ms.Sidhi Arora, Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Ms.Hina Shaheen and Ms.Puja Sarkar, Advocates. versus SHRI ANIL KUMAR & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Ms.Sangeeta Tomar, Advocate. AND + W.P.(C) 16718/2006 & C.M. Nos. 18454/2012 & 20503/2014 UOI THROUGH THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF DEFENCE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Manish Mohan, Advocate alongwith Ms.Sidhi Arora, Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Ms.Hina Shaheen and Ms.Puja Sarkar, Advocates. versus SHRI RAM KUMAR & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Ms.Sangeeta Tomar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT1 Vide the present order I am disposing of Writ Petitions (Civil) No.16718/2006 & 16715/2006 since in both the cases, common question of facts and law is involved...
M/S S.D.Buildwell Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Rail Land Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-18-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:18. h May, 2015 % + W.P.(C) 3332/2012 & CM. No.6219/2015 M/S S.D.BUILDWELL PVT.LTD. ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Salman Hashmi, Mr. Zeeshan Hashmi and Mr. Harsh Prabhakar, Advs. Versus RAIL LAND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Saurabh Mishra, Mr. Dhan Rai and Mr. Anshuman Upadhyay, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.W.P.(C) 3332/2012 1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed as under: a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ (s) / order (s) / direction (s) quashing the letter dated 14.03.2012 addressed by respondent to the petitioner; b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ (s) / order(s)/direction (s) directing the Respondent to refund to the Petitioner the following sums: (i) The upfront premium of Rs.26.23 Crores paid by the petitioner, (ii) the sum of Rs.2.06 Crores,...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-18-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:30. 04.2015 Pronounced on:18. 05.2015 + ITA1102005 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI Appellant Through: Sh. Rohit Madan, Sr. Standing Counsel. Versus M.M. AQUA TECHNOLOGIES LTD. ..Respondent Through: Sh. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Chandrachur Bhattacharyya, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The following question of law arises for determination in this appeal:Whether the funding of the interest amount by way of a term loan amounts to actual payment as contemplated by Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961?.2. The brief facts are that the assessee was heavily indebted to its institutional creditors. ICICI was the lead manager of those creditors. The ITA1102005 Page 1 accumulated interest on the overdue principal had mounted to `3,00,14,900. The assessee was unable to discharge this interest liability due to its financial hards...
Ajay Kumar Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-18-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.4942/2015 & C.M.Nos.8934-8935/2015 % 18th May, 2015 AJAY KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: None versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Ms.Bharathi Raju, CGSC, for R- 1 & 2. Mr.Manoj, Standing Counsel for R-3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. No one was present for the petitioner on the first call. No one is present for the petitioner even on the second call although it is 2.45 P.M. I am hence proceeding to dispose of the writ petition on merits.2. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner impugns the show cause notice dated 27.1.2015 issued by the respondent no.1. By the show cause notice, petitioner has been called upon to explain his case, as to why the petitioners candidature should not be cancelled and the petitioner be prevented from appearing in Staff Selection Commissions examinations for ...
M/S Saptagiri Restaurant Vs. Airports Authority of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-18-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:18. 05.2015 W.P.(C) 6732/2014 & CM No.15946/2014 M/S SAPTAGIRI RESTAURANT ..... Petitioner versus AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr J.K. Mittal and Mr Rajveer Singh. For the Respondent : Ms Anjana Gosain and Mr Pradeep Desodya. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner impugns a notice dated 10.04.2014 (hereafter impugned notice) issued by the respondent (hereafter AAI) terminating the licenses granted to the petitioner for operation of snack bar counters in the Security Hold Area (East and West Wing) of the New Domestic Terminal at Chennai Airport. By the impugned notice, the petitioner has been called upon to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the snack bars being operated by the petitioner under license from AAI.2. The petitioner contended that its licenses for running snack bar counters at the New Dom...
Raj Kumar Rastogi Vs. P.O. Labour Court-X and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-18-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4815/2001 % Judgment reserved on 27.04.2015 Judgment pronounced on:18. 05.2015 RAJ KUMAR RASTOGI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Rajiv Aggarwal and Mr Sachin Kumar, Advocates versus P.O. LABOUR COURT-X & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Anurag Lakhotia, Advocate for Respondent No.2 (M/s Delhi Press) CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT1 Vide the present writ petition, the petitioner-workman has challenged the award dated 23.04.2001, whereby the learned Labour Court has held that the petitioner is not a workman within the meaning of Section 2(s) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ID Act), hence not entitled to any relief.2. The petitioner had set out a case before the Labour Court, wherein in his Statement of Claim he had alleged that he was employed with the Management since 01.06.1983 and from the very beginning, he had been working as full time Grainer, yet in the appointment letter he was sh...
Smt Kanta Devi Vs. M/S Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya and Anr .
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-18-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3589/2015 Judgment reserved on:23. 04.2015 Judgement pronounced on:18. 05.2015 SMT KANTA DEVI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Shiv Prakash Pandey and Mr Raghav Pandey and Ms Arunima Dwivedi, Advs. versus M/S SARVODAYA KANYA VIDYALAYA & ANR . Respondents Through: Mr Gursharan Singh, Advocate Mr Arvind Kumar, Deputy Education Officer, Zone-VI, District North-East. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT1 Vide the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the award dated 18th March, 2014 whereby the learned Labour court has held that the petitioner was not entitled to any relief since there was no relationship of an employer and an employee between the petitioner and the respondent nos. 1 and 2 and that she was engaged by PTA (parent-teacher association) and was also paid her salary /honorarium from the PTA fund and that PTA was not an industry within the meaning of Section 2(J) of the Industrial Disputes Act.2. Aggrieve...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »