Delhi Court October 2016 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.
Kumar Avikal Manu vs.union of India and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
$~38 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Writ Petition (C) No.9706/2016 Date of decision:21. t October, 2016 KUMAR AVIKAL MANU ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Raman Kapur, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Manish Kumar, Mr. Yudhister Singh and Mr. Piyush Kaushik, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondent Through Ms. Shiva Lakshmi, CGSC with Mr. Ruchir R Rai, Adv. for R-1 & 2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): CM No.38838/2016 Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. W.P.(C) No.9706/2016 1. The petitioner-Kumar Avikal Manu by this writ petition impugns the order dated 27.09.2016 whereby OA No.3929/2013 was dismissed on the ground of limitation.2. The petitioner, who suffers from locomotor disability, had W.P. (C) No.9706/2016 Page 1 of 5 qualified in the Civil Services Examination, 2006 and is an officer of the Indian Revenue Service (Income Tax).3. The petitioner had earlier ...
Nirog Pharma Pvt Ltd vs.umesh Gupta & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
$~15. * + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(OS) 2517/2015 Judgment dated 21st October, 2016 NIROG PHARMA PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff Through Mr. Manish Biala and Mr. Shobhit Agarwal, Advocates versus UMESH GUPTA & ANR Through None .... Defendants CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S. SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. None for the defendants. Written Statement has also not been filed; despite summons having been issued as far back as 24.08.2015, service effected on 05.12.2015 and vakalatnama filed on behalf of the defendants on 19.01.2016. The counsel for the plaintiff prays that the present case may be decreed by invoking the provisions of Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. He further submits that there are sufficient documents on record and also the fact that the plaint is supported by an affidavit of the plaintiff, thus, it is not necessary to lead evidence.2. The plaintiff has instituted the present suit praying inter alia for permanent injunction against the defenda...
Smt. Indu vs.shri. Sri Kishan & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RSA No.311/2016 21st October, 2016 Through: Mr. A.K.Dhupar, Advocate. versus ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS + % SMT. INDU SHRI. SRI KISHAN & ANR. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA Through: To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No.38776/2016 (Exemption) 1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. CM No.38778/2016 (condonation of delay of 90 days) 2. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 90 days in filing the appeal is condoned. CM stands disposed of. CM No.38779/2016 (condonation of delay of 60 days in re-filing the appeal) 3. For the reasons stated in the application delay of 60 days in re- filing the appeal is condoned. RSA No.311/2016 Page 1 of 7 CM stands disposed of. RSA No.311/2016 & CM No.38777/2016 (stay) 4. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the concurrent Judgments of the courts below; ...
Sh. Lt. Sadhu Ram Through His Wife vs.delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment :21. 10.2016 + W.P.(C) 9716/2016 SH. LT. SADHU RAM THROUGH HIS WIFE ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Sandeep Khatri and Ms. Prabhkeen Kaur, Advocates. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent Through Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(oral) C.M. No.38847/2016 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Application disposed of. W.P.(C) 9716/2016 & C.M. No.38848/2016 1 By way of this writ petition, petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 07.10.2014 passed by the District Judge qua 26 bighs 17 biswas of land bearing Khasra no.110 min. situated at Bela Estate, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the suit property) 2 The facts which emanate from the petition disclose that petitioner was the member of the Delhi Peasants Cooperative Multipurpose Society Ltd. WP(C)No.9716/2016 Page 1 of 15 (hereinafter referred to as the Society). I...
Centaur Hotel vs.assistant Provident Fund Commissioner
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
$~61 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:21. 10.2016 W.P.(C) 9649/2016, CM APPLs. 38581/2016 & 38582/2016 CENTAUR HOTEL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. R.S. Suri, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Suruchi Suri and Mr. Ninad Dogra, Advs. versus ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER Through: Mr.Keshav Mohan and Mr. Piyush Choudhary, Advs. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J.(oral) W.P.(C) 9649/2016, CM APPLs. 38581/2016 & 38582/2016 Mr. Keshav Mohan, who appears on service of advance copy states 1. that the matter may be heard and disposed off finally.2. At joint request, the case is taken up for final hearing.3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that subsequent to the order dated 10.11.2014, no monies were paid, therefore, the due amount of Rs. 1,87,27,805/- was sought to be recovered through recovery proceedings. Besides the petitioner never filed any documents because it had fore-closed its own case.4. The pe...
Sahakar Global Ltd vs.national Highways Authority of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
$~ * 8 + CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR ORDER2010.2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ARB.P. 326/2016 SAHAKAR GLOBAL LTD ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rakesh Sinha with Mr. Pawan Kumar Bansal, Advocates. versus NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mukesh Kumar and Ms. Bharana, Advocates. % 1. This is a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) filed by the... Petitioner, Sahakar Global Limited, against the Respondent, National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising out of the Contract Agreement dated 18th March, 2015 whereby the Respondent-NHAI engaged the... Petitioner for collection of user fees at Tanuku Toll Plaza from the designated vehicles at the specified rates. The said Contract Agreement contains an arbitration clause. In terms thereof, the Courts in Delhi were to have th...
Sandeep Ahlawat vs.state (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : OCTOBER20 2016 CRL.A.769/2016 & CRL.M.B.1510/2016 SANDEEP AHLAWAT ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Siddharth Yadav with Mr.Akshay, Advocates. VERSUS ..... Respondent STATE (NCT OF DELHI) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG Through : Mr.Arun Kr.Sharma, APP. SI Karan Singh, Crime Branch. + S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant-Sandeep Ahlawat to challenge the correctness and legality of a judgment dated 26.11.2014 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.arising out of FIR No.registered at Police Station Crime Branch whereby he was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 411/471/171 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act. By an order dated 3.12.2014, he was awarded various prison terms maximum for four years. All the sentences were to operate concurrently. Crl.A.769/2016 Page 1 of 3 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge- sheet was that on 11.0...
Western Digital Technologies Inc & Anr vs.mr Ashish Kumar & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
$~44 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Dated:20. h October, 2016 CS(COMM) 1155/2016 WESTERN DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES INC & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through Ms. Shwetasree Majumder and Mr. Prithi Singh, Advocates versus MR ASHISH KUMAR & ANR ..... Defendants Through Mr. Naresh Kaushik and Ms. Joymoti Mize, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL) 1. Plaintiffs have filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of registered trade marks, passing off of unfair competition, delivery up and rendition of accounts.2. As per the plaint, the plaintiffs are world-renowned manufacturers and marketers of inter alia storage devices, media players, routers/switches/bridges, comprising of OEM/system manufacturer, desktop and enterprise, solid state drives(SSD) and software and mobile applications which are marketed and sold under the plaintiffs trademarks. In India, the plaintiff no.1 holds statutory rights in the plaintiffs tradem...
Cit vs.m/s Kuwer Fibres (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Decided on :20. 10.2016 + ITA1632001 CIT Through: Mr. Ashok Manchanda, Advocate along with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung and Ms. EashaKadian, Advocate. ..... Appellant versus M/S KUWER FIBRES (P) LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate along with Ms. Mehvish Khan, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) The following questions of law arise for consideration in this appeal 1. under Section 260A of Income Tax Act. (a) Whether ITAT was correct in law and on facts in allowing the relief to the assessee out of addition: (i) Of . 1,44,17,441/- made by the A.O. on account of unexplained initial investment in purchase of polyster films; (ii) Of . 6,05,317/- made by A.O. on account of profits on unaccounted purchase and sale of polyster films which assessee itself had disclosed in its original returns; ITA1632001 Page 1 of 12 (iii) Of . 73,76,782/- mad...
Tej Narain @ Narain vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Reserved on: September 27, 2016 Judgment Delivered on: October 20, 2016 CRL.A. 1260/2015 TEJ NARAIN @ NARAIN ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. K. Singhal, Adv. STATE versus Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for ..... Respondent the State. CRL.A. 10/2016 + SUKHIYA Represented by: Ms. Rakhi Dubey, Advocate. ..... Appellant STATE versus ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State. CRL.A. 1381/2015 + RAM UDAGAR STATE Represented by: Mr. Jivesh Tiwari, Adv.. ..... Appellant versus ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.the State.1. Vide impugned judgment dated August 1, 2015, Tej Narain alias Narain, the appellant in Crl. A. 1260/2015, Sukhiya, the appellant in Crl. A. Crl.A. 1260/2015, 10/2016 & 1381/2015 Page 1 of 6 10/2016 and Ram Udagar, the appellant in Crl. A. 1381/2015 were convicted for offence punishable under Section 366...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »