Delhi Court October 2017 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2017 Page 30 of about 590 results (0.019 seconds)Rajiv Jain & Anr vs.registrar Co-Operative & Ors
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P. (C) 8073/2017 RAJIV JAIN & ANR Date of Decision:23. 10.2017 ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Rajiv K. Nanda, Ms. Aastha Jain and Mr. Sanjeev K. Balyan, Advocates. Versus REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Ramesh Singh, Standing Counsel along with Mr. Sandeepan Pathak, Advocate for respondent No.1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HONBLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) 1. The present writ petition assails an order dated 23rd May, 2017, rendered by the Delhi Co-operative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal) in Miscellaneous Application No.03/2017 filed in Appeal No.190/2008/DCT; whereby, an application analogous to Order XLI Rule 19 WP(C) 8073/2017 Page 1 of 4 read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking restoration of the appeal along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay were dismissed.2. Mr. Rajiv K. Nanda, learne...
Tag this Judgment!Kali Charan vs.mahavir Singh
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % KALI CHARAN RFA No.890/2017 23rd October, 2017 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Dalip Kumar Santoshi, Advocate. versus MAHAVIR SINGH ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. No.37699/2017 (for exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. C.M. Appl. No.37701/2017 (for delay) 2. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 12 days in re-filing the appeal. For the reasons stated in the application the same is allowed and the delay of 12 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. C.M. stands disposed of. RFA No.890/2017 Page 1 of 10 RFA No.890/2017 and C.M. Appl. No.37700/2017 (for stay) 3. This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 5.7.2017 by which the trial court has decreed the suit for posse...
Tag this Judgment!Rajinder Kumar vs.state of Delhi
Court: Delhi
$~R-11A to R-11C * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + AND + AND + Date of Decision : October 23, 2017 CRL.A. 99/2002 ASHOK AHSWAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Mukesh Kalia, Mr.Sudarshan Rajan, Mr.Arjun Gadhoke & Ms.Chand Gera, Advs. versus STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State with SI Varun PS Hauz Khas CRL.A. 105/2002 RAJINDER KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Vikas Jain, Advocate. versus STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State with SI Varun PS Hauz Khas CRL.A.852/2002 Through: None. ..... Appellant versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP for the SANJAY STATE State with SI Varun PS Hauz Khas CRL.A.Nos.99/2002, 105/2002 & 852/2002 Page 1 of 17 PRATIBHA RANI, J.(ORAL) 1. By this common judgment, the above three appeals which have been filed by the appellants namely Ashok Ahswal, Rajinder Kumar and Sanjay challenging the judgment dated 24th January, 2002 and order on sentence dated 25th Januar...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.amit Kumar & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-348 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC APPEAL No.515/2011 Decided on:23. d October, 2017 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Shantha Devi Raman & Mr. Arihant Jain, Advs. versus AMIT KUMAR & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The first respondent (claimant) had suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 20.07.2008 involving two vehicles one being Tata 407 tempo bearing registration No.DL1C9583(Tata tempo) and the other truck bearing registration No.HR46 7821 (the truck). The tata tempo was driven by the claimant while the truck was driven by the second respondent (driver), it being registered in the name of the third respondent (the registered owner), it concededly being insured against third party risk with the appellant insurance company (insurer) for the period in question. On the accident claim case (case No.660/2009) instituted on 01.09.2009 by the claimant, t...
Tag this Judgment!u.p. Distillers Association vs.commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:23. 10.2017 ITA8302017 U.P. DISTILLERS ASSOCIATION ..... Appellant versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Mr Asheesh Jain, Advocate for Income Tax Deptt. : Mr S.Krishnan, Advocate. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent CORAM:-"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) : ITA8302017 & CM No.35731/2017(delay in re-filing the appeal for 15 days) 1. The Assessee is aggrieved by an order of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upholding the C.I.Ts determination that it was disentitled to registration under Section 12AA as a Charitable Trust under the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The facts are that a search took place on 14.02.2006 in the premises of one Mr R.K.Miglani who was the Secretary General of ITA8302017 Page 1 of 5 the UPDA/Assessee.3. During the course of search, th...
Tag this Judgment!The Commissioner of Income Tax- Exemption vs.patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas)
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:23. 10.2017 ITA8862017 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- EXEMPTION ..... Appellant $~ * + Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel for IT Dept. with Mr. Gaurav Khetarpal, Advocate versus PATANJALI YOGPEETH (NYAS) Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL) 1. This appeal pertains to A.Y. 2009-10. The Revenue urges several questions of law. The main contention is that the activities of the respondent/assessee, registered as a charitable trust, can be only brought within the fold of an organization covered by Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as the Act), to the extent that its activities extend to providing services of general public utility. The assessees contention that it provides medical aid because it teaches through various camps and other modes, the benefits of yoga and disseminates i...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Standard Glass International vs.macdonald Mohan Distillers Ltd
Court: Delhi
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:23. 10.2017 CO.PET. No.213/1999 M/S STANDARD GLASS INTERNATIONAL Through: None .Petitioner Versus MACDONALD MOHAN DISTILLERS LTD Respondent Through: Mr.D.Bhattacharya, Adv. for OL CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) CO.APPL. 1710/2017 & C.P.No.213/2017 1. The present application under section 481 of the Companies Act, 1956 has been filed on behalf of the Official Liquidator seeking dissolution of the Respondent Company. It is submitted that the Official Liquidator attached to this Honble Court was appointed as Provisional Liquidator vide Order dated 17.02.2000; and then vide Order dated 27.05.2005 this Honble Court finally directed the winding up of the Company, whereupon the Official Liquidator attached to this Honble Court was appointed as its Liquidator. The citation thereof was published in the newspapers namely Statesman (English edition) on 11.04.2005 and Veer Arjun (Hindi edition) on 10.04....
Tag this Judgment!The Commissioner of Customs (Export) vs.m/s Sipca India Ltd & Ors
Court: Delhi
$~4 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CUS.A.C. 5/2012 THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT) Date of decision:23. d October, 2017 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amit Bansal, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Akhil Kulshrestha, Advocates. versus M/S SIPCA INDIA LTD & ORS ....... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. L. Badri Narayan, Mr. Yogendra Sachdev, Aldak & Mr. Karan Advocates for R-1, 4 & 5. Mr. Chirag M. Shroff & Ms. Monisha Suri, Advocates for R-3&8. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT (ORAL) SANJIV KHANNA, J.1. The issue, raised in the present appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 which impugns the order dated 27th September, 2011 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, relates to exemption from customs duty under Notification 40/2006-CUS. As per the appellant, the respondent is not entitled to the said exemption on import of consignment of printing ink (OVI) meant for printing of currency notes ...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay vs.state
Court: Delhi
$~R-11A to R-11C * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + AND + AND + Date of Decision : October 23, 2017 CRL.A. 99/2002 ASHOK AHSWAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Mukesh Kalia, Mr.Sudarshan Rajan, Mr.Arjun Gadhoke & Ms.Chand Gera, Advs. versus STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State with SI Varun PS Hauz Khas CRL.A. 105/2002 RAJINDER KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Vikas Jain, Advocate. versus STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State with SI Varun PS Hauz Khas CRL.A.852/2002 Through: None. ..... Appellant versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP for the SANJAY STATE State with SI Varun PS Hauz Khas CRL.A.Nos.99/2002, 105/2002 & 852/2002 Page 1 of 17 PRATIBHA RANI, J.(ORAL) 1. By this common judgment, the above three appeals which have been filed by the appellants namely Ashok Ahswal, Rajinder Kumar and Sanjay challenging the judgment dated 24th January, 2002 and order on sentence dated 25th Januar...
Tag this Judgment!Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd vs.meena & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-338 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:23. d October, 2017 + MAC APPEAL No.456/2011 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. .... Appellant Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. versus MEENA & ORS. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Kumar Pandey, Adv. for R-1,2 & 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. On accident claim case (Suit No.16/2010) of the first to fourth respondents (collectively, the claimants) instituted on 29.10.2009, the motor accident claims tribunal, by its judgment dated 07.04.2011, returned a finding, inter alia, on the issue of involvement of vehicle described as TATA Truck bearing registration No.DL1 B-5871 and negligence in its driving by the sixth respondent leading to the accident resulting in the death of Amar and on such basis granting an award of compensation in the total sum of Rs. 8,41,000/-.2. The insurance company filed the present appeal taking exception to the procedure followed by the tribunal so as to hold the said driver ...
Tag this Judgment!