Delhi Court November 2017 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.
South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs.m/s Prithvi Associates
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-28-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:21. t November, 2017 Pronounced on:28. h November, 2017 + O.M.P. (COMM) 411/2017, IA No.13656/2017 SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.Rakesh Kumar Dudeja with Mr.Akshay Kapuria, Advs. versus M/S PRITHVI ASSOCIATES Through : Mr.S.K.Maniktala, Adv. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This petition is under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for setting aside the impugned award dated 11.08.2017 passed by Sh.S.K. Tandon (Retd. Additional District Judge), sole arbitrator in arbitration case No.DAC/655/11-14 titled as M/s Prithvi Associates vs. South Delhi Municipal Corporation.2. On 04.09.2006 the petitioner had awarded to the respondent firm a contract granting "Rights for illuminated display of Advertisements through Unipoles" and to this effect an Agreement dated 04.09.2006 was entered into between the parties. O.M.P (COMM) No.411/2017 Page ...
M/S Simbhaoli Sugars Ltd and Anr vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-28-2017
$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9723/2016 M/S SIMBHAOLI SUGARS LTD AND ANR ........ Petitioners Through: Mr Somnath Shukla, Ms Ashwini Chandrasekharan, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr Akshay Makhija, CGSC with Ms Divyya Kapur, Advocate for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER2811.2017 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 08.03.2016 passed by respondent no.3 (Policy Relaxation Committee - hereafter PRC) and an order dated 22.09.2015 passed by respondent No.2 (hereafter DGFT). By the aforesaid orders, the petitioners applications for extension of time to complete its export obligations were rejected.2. It is the petitioners case that it was unable to complete the export obligations for reasons beyond its control. The petitioner claims that in view of the orders passed by Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) bearing PIL No.2952...
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.fakir Chand Taneja & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-28-2017
Through: Mr. Vikas Jain, Advocate. ..... Appellants ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Advocate for R2. Mr. A.K. Soni, Advocate for R5. versus FAKIR CHAND TANEJA & ORS SUDAMA GUPTA & ORS + MAC.APP. 806/2012 + MAC.APP. 951/2012 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA FAKIR CHAND TANEJA & ORS versus THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. .....Appellant Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Advocate. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Advocate for R8. $~R-559 & 560 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:28. h November, 2017 JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Sunil Taneja, working as Assistant Vice President (Exports) in a private company (Maral Oversees Limited), then aged 36 years, was travelling as a passenger in a motor vehicle described as Tata Qualis, bearing registration No.MP-09V-6753 (the car), on 03.02.2007 from MAC App. No.806/2012 & 951/2012 Page 1 of 5 District Khargone, Madhya Pradesh to Shirdi in Maharashtra. At about 7.30 a.m., when the car had reached the area of Babhalephat...
Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) vs.raguvanshi Charitable Trust
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-28-2017
$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:28. 11.2017 ITA10652017 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)..... Appellant ..... Respondent Sanjay Kumar, Sr. with Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Adv. : Mr. versus RAGUVANSHI CHARITABLE TRUST, Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant(s) Standing Counsel . For the Respondent(s) CORAM:-"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) None. :1. The question of law sought to be urged by the Revenue in this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is whether the findings of the ITAT with respect to its claim for double deduction by the assessee a charitable trust under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act was justified.2. The assessee established a school under the name Guru Gram ITA10652017 Page 1 of 3 Public School International at Gurgaon and was notified as public charitable trust on 23.09.2004 after which it claimed deduction under the Inc...
Rockfurd Education Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs.luv Kush Infrastructure Pvt. Lt ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-28-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CS(OS) 234/2014 Date of Decision:28. 11.2017 ROCKFURD EDUCATION PVT. LTD. & ORS. ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr. M.K.Miglani and Mr. Gaurav Miglani, Advs. versus LUV KUSH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. Through None. .... Defendant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. Arguments have been heard in the suit. Despite service none has appeared on behalf of Defendants. Since, Defendant did not appear, nor written statement was filed, they were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 15.04.2014.2. The plaintiffs have filed the present suit seeking a decree of permanent injunction against the defendant for infringement of the registered Trade Marks/labels of the plaintiffs SHEMROCK and SHEMFORD and for claiming rights in their registered Trade Mark. Other connected reliefs are also sought.3. It is the contention of the plaintiffs that they provide services relating to education and training through running schools under the tradema...
Vikram Singh vs.government of National Capital Territory of Delhi & Or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-28-2017
$~26 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:28. h November, 2017 + W.P.(C) 2297/2016 VIKRAM SINGH ........ Petitioner Through: Ms.Deepika V. Marwaha, Mr.Vinay K.Shailendra and Ms.Worthing Kasar, Advocates versus GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS. Through: Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Standing counsel for LAC/L&B with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner. The petitioner seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land of the petitioner measuring 1 bigha and 6 biswas out of 16 bighas and 4 biswas (being shares in 43 bighas and 4 biswas) falling in Khasra nos. 1269 (4- 16), 1272 (4-16), 1273 (4-16), 1284 (4-16), 1285 (4-16), 1286 (4-16), 1287 (4-16) 1288(4-16), 1292 (4-16) having possession of land in Khasra No.1269 (4-16 ), sit...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs.gunmati & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-28-2017
$~R-581 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:28. h November, 2017 + MAC.APP. 932/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Through: Mr. Priyadarshi Acharya, Advocate ..... Appellant Versus GUNMATI & ORS. Through: Nemo. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The first respondent (claimant), then aged 51 years, suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that occurred on 11.12.2010, upon being hit by a car bearing registration No.DL-5CD-3614 driven in a negligent manner. She instituted accident claim case (MACT No.272/2011) on 17.02.2011, seeking compensation. The tribunal held inquiry and, by judgment dated 10.04.2012, returned a finding that the accident had occurred due to negligence of the car driver Shyam Singh, the second respondent in the appeal. The tribunal awarded compensation in the total sum of Rs.2,28,909/- and directed the appellant to pay the same with interest, it admittedly being the insurer of the car against third party r...
Bhavya Kiran Arya vs.union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-28-2017
$~29. * + W.P.(C) 3647/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI BHAVYA KIRAN ARYA ........ Petitioner 1. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR Through: Mr. Kiran Babu, Advocate versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Jitesh Vikram Srivastava, Advocate for R-1 and R-2 alongwith Mr. Manish Goyal, Parokar. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI % The present petition assails the order dated 09.05.2016 passed by the ORDER2811.2017 Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi, dismissing the Original Application filed by the petitioner, seeking directions to the respondents/Department of Posts to refund a sum of Rs.25,993/- towards one months salary recovered from her at the time of tendering her resignation from the post of temporary Postal Assistant.2. The relevant admitted facts of the case are that on 12.02.2014, the petitioner was selected to the post of temporary Postal Assistant as an outsider candidate under the quota reserved for the physically handi...
M/S. Gkn Driveline India Ltd. Vs.commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA5422005 Reserved on :16. h November, 2017 Date of decision :27. h November, 2017 M/S. GKN DRIVELINE INDIA LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. V. P. Gupta and Mr. Anunav Kumar, Advocates. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Asheesh Jain, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Shahrukh Ejaz, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh J., This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) arises out of order dated 26th October, 2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short ITAT) in ITA No.1281/Del/1999. On 14th December, 2005, the appeal was admitted and the 2. following questions of law were framed. 1. Whether the ITAT was right in holding that payment of Rs.70 lakhs made by the appellant on ITA5422005 Page 1 of 13 account of non-competition for a period of five years was in the nature of capital expenditure?...
M/S Bhayana Builders Pvt Ltd vs.kamal Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-27-2017
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1263/2012 % M/S BHAYANA BUILDERS PVT LTD versus Through: Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Ms. Manmeet Kaur, Mr. Yashvardhan Bandi, Ms.Rashmita Roy Chowdhry, Advocates ..... Plaintiff ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Sudeep Kumar Shrotriya, Mr. Varun Kalia, Mr. Vikas Poonia, Advocates KAMAL KUMAR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW ORDER2711.2017 IA85372017 (of the plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC) 1. The plaintiff, in this Suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale of immovable property, seeks to amend the plaint to, in the alternative to the relief of specific performance, seek damages from the defendant.2. Reliance is placed on Shamsu Suhara Beevi vs. G. Alex & Anr. (2004) 8 SCC569and on Section 21 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.3. The only objection of the counsel for the defendant is of the relief by way of compensation being barred by time on the date the application was filed and the amendment changing the nature ...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »