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.
Dr. Amulya Mysore Vs. National Board of Examination and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:14. 05.2015 W.P.(C) 2724/2015 & CM No.4887/2015 DR. AMULYA MYSORE ..... Petitioner versus NATIONAL BOARD OF EXAMINATION & ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Ms Preerna Singhwith Mr Guntur Pramod Kumar and Mr Prashant Mathur. For the Respondents : Dr Rakesh Gosain for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner is aggrieved by a decision of the National Board of Examination (hereafter referred to as NBE), communicated by a letter dated 07.08.2013, holding the petitioner to be ineligible for the Diplomate of National Board Final Examination held in December 2012. Although the petitioner had successfully cleared the said examination, as a consequence of the aforesaid decision, her candidature has been cancelled. The petitioner represented against the said decision pursuant to the liberty granted by this Court. However, the same was also rej...
Uma Nath and Ors. Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-2015
$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:14. h May, 2015 + CRL.A. 319/2013 UMA NATH & ORS. Through: ..... Appellants Mr.S.B.Dinkar, Advocate along with the appellants in person. versus STATE OF DELHI Through: ..... Respondent Ms.Fizani Hussain, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State along with Sub-Inspector Umesh Rana from Police Station Ashok Vihar, North West District, Delhi. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA : SUNITA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment dated 01.02.2013 and order on sentence dated 06.02.2013 vide which the appellants were convicted for offence under Section 308/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one and a half years each and fine of Rs.1000/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months in Sessions Case No.14/2011 arising out of FIR No.42/2010 under Section 308/323/324/452/506/120B/34 IPC, present appeal has been preferred.2. The prosecution case succinctly stated, is as...
Hari Durga Travels Vs. Commissioner of Trade and Taxes, Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: April 16, 2015 Pronounced on: May 14, 2015 + ST.APPL. 62/2014 HARI DURGA TRAVELS Through ..... Petitioner Mr. R K Kapoor, Ms. Kheyali Sarkar and Ms. Anupriya Singh, Advs. Versus COMMISSIONER OF TRADE & TAXES, DELHI ..... Respondent Through Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani, sr. standing counsel with Ms. Megha Bharara, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA % 1. This appeal under Section 81 of Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as the DVAT Act) assails the order dated 11.07.2014 passed by Appellate Tribunal, Value Added Tax, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in appeal Nos. 625626/ATVAT/08-09. By the impugned order, the Tribunal upheld the findings and conclusions recorded by the Objection Hearing Authority (OHA) in its order dated 14.11.2008 rejecting the contentions of the appellant (hereafter referred to as the Assessee) and upholding the order p...
Agya Ram Arora Vs. Surjeet Mech. Tools
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 1041/2014 Reserved on:21. t April, 2015 Decided on:14. h May, 2015 % AGYA RAM ARORA Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Adv. versus SURJEET MECH. TOOLS Through ..... Respondent Mr. Shiv Kumar Sharma, Adv. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Aggrieved by the order dated 16th October, 2014 granting leave to defend to the respondent in an eviction petition filed by the petitioner under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act, the petitioner Agya Ram Arora prefers the present petition.2. In the eviction petition Agya Ram stated that he was the owner of property bearing No.1017/342, Gali No.4, Industrial Area, New Rohtak Road, Delhi (in short the suit property). On some portion of the ground floor of the suit property Agya Ram was doing the business of electroplating. Another shop on the ground floor as well as the first floor of the suit property were being used for the purpose of manufacturing and retailing auto-parts ...
H. N. Wadhwa Vs. Punjab National Bank and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.7343/2014 14th May, 2015 % H. N. WADHWA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Ashok Bhalla, Advocate. versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Jagat Arora, Advocate with Mr. Rajat Arora, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the relief against the respondent no.1/Bank that once the Disciplinary Authoritys order dated 10.6.1991 was set aside by the learned Single Judge of this Court treating it to be non est vide judgment dated 20.12.2006 in W.P.(C) No.3047/1993, petitioner during the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings/departmental proceedings which afresh was to then decide the punishment to be imposed upon the petitioner, petitioner should be treated to be on deemed suspension in this period after 10.6.1991 till the time fresh ...
Mrf Limited Vs. Commissioner of Trade and Taxes
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: April 13, 2015 Pronounced on: May 14, 2015 + + ST.APPL.1/2015 ST.APPL.2/2015 MRF LIMITED ..... Appellant Through: Sh. Tarun Gulati, Sh. Sparsh Bhargava, Sh. Anupam Mishra, Ms. Rachana Yadav, Sh. Shashi Mathews and Sh. Kishore Kunal, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF TRADE AND TAXES ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani, Addl. Standing Counsel, GNCTD with Ms. Megha Bharara with Ms. Bandana Shukla, Advocates, for GNCTD. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA % 1. These two appeals filed under Section 81 of Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (DVAT Act, for short) seek to assail similar orders passed on 30.07.2014 and 04.08.2014 by Appellate Tribunal: Value Added Tax, Delhi (the Tribunal, for short) in the matter of assessment of the appellant company (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) respecting the levy of sales tax for different Assessment Years (AY), starting wi...
Rajesh Bansal Vs. Amit Singhal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-2015
$~9. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:27. 04.2015 Judgment delivered on:14. 05.2015 CRL.L.P. 708/2014 RAJESH BANSAL Through: versus ..... Petitioner Mr. Kshitij Sharda, Advocate. AMIT SINGHAL ..... Respondent Mr. Aman Bhalla, Advocate. Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. After hearing learned counsel, leave granted.2. Let the appeal be registered and numbered. Crl.A. No.3. /2015 (to be registered and numbered) I heard learned counsel finally at the admission stage with their consent and reserved judgment. Accordingly, I now proceed to dispose of the appeal.4. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 15.09.2014 passed in complaint No.95/2012, whereby the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, has acquitted the respondentaccused of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act).5. The case of the appellant/complainant, as emerging from the compl...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. M/S. Velocient Technologies Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:19. 03.2015 Pronounced on:14. 05.2015 + ITA9832006 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHIAppellant Versus M/S. VELOCIENT TECHNOLOGIES LTD. ..Respondent + ITA14062006 M/S. VELOCIENT TECHNOLOGIES LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX + ITA13422009 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus VELOCIENT TECHNOLOGIES LTD. Appellant ..Respondent Appellant ..Respondent Through: Sh. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel and Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Jr. Standing Counsel, for the Revenue. Sh. Salil Aggarwal and Sh. Prakash Kumar, Advocates, for Velocient Technologies Ltd. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The following questions of law arise in these three appeals: (a) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct both on facts and in law in upholding the assumption of jurisdiciton by the Assesing ITA9832006 AND CONNECTED MATTERS Page 1 Officer to frame an assessment by taking reco...
M/S National Highways Authority of India Vs. Hindustan Construction Co ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-2015
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. 152/2014 M/S NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Kapur with Mr. Anil Kumar and Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocates. versus HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION CO LTD .... Respondent Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Malaika Lal, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER % 14.05.2015 IA No.2283/2014 1. This is an application seeking condonation of 37 days delay in refiling the petition.2. The petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (Act), challenging the Award dated 12th August, 2013, was first filed by the petitioner on 11th November, 2013. After defects were pointed out on 12th November 2013 by the Registry, the petition was re-filed on 22nd November 2013. Thereafter the Registry had again pointed out that some of the defects were yet to be cured. The petition was re-filed for the third time on 17th December, 2013 but all the defects were not yet cured. One of ...
Rameshwar Lal Vs. Escorts Finance Ltd. and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-2015
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. 308 of 2014 RAMESHWAR LAL Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Padma Priya, Advocate versus ESCORTS FINANCE LTD. AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sidhant Kaushik, Advocate for Respondent No.1; Mr. A.K.Mishra for Respondent No.2 CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER % 14.05.2015 1. The challenge in this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 is to an Award dated 20th December, 2013 passed by the learned Arbitrator.2. The background to this petition is that Escorts Finance Limited (EFL), Respondent No.1 herein, advanced a loan in the sum of Rs. 14 lakhs to Mr. Kartha Ram Chowdhry (Respondent No.3) under a Hire-Purchase Agreement dated 25th December, 2001. The Petitioner, who stood as guarantor, was also a party to the Agreement.3. When Respondent No.3 defaulted in repayment of the loan, after having paid the last instalment on 31st March, 2005, Respondent No.1 purportedly invoked the arbitration clause an...
- ‹ Prev
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- Next ›
- Last »