Delhi Court December 2017 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2017 Page 36 of about 598 results (0.018 seconds)Cvs Insurance and Investments vs.vipul It Infrasoft Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:29. h November, 2017 Pronounced on:08. h December 2017 + ARB.P. 9/2017 CVS INSURANCE AND INVESTMENTS ........ Petitioner Through : Ms.Pritha Srikumar and Ms.Neha Mathew, Advocates. versus VIPUL IT INFRASOFT PVT. LTD. Through : Mr.Nitesh K ..... Respondent Sharma and Mr.Rupesh Gupta, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 raises a question as to where shall be the seat of the arbitration viz. at Delhi or Noida when the agreement between the parties give exclusive jurisdiction to courts at Noida?.2. Suffice is to note the parties entered into an agreement dated 1.1.2013 and had some disputes qua payments. Article 12 of the Arb.P.No.9/2017 Page 1 of 10 agreement relates to arbitration. It was invoked by the petitioner and as ignored by the respondent, the petitioner has filed this petition.3. Article 12 of the Agreement...
Tag this Judgment!Manoj @ Pintoo vs.state (Govt. Of Nct) of Delhi
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :25. h NOVEMBER, 2017 DECIDED ON :8. h DECEMBER, 2017 + CRL.A. 300/2014 MANOJ @ PINTOO ..... Appellant Through : Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR S.P.GARG, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is a judgment dated 27.09.2013 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.7/2012 arising out of FIR No.309/2011 PS Farsh Bazar by which the appellant Manoj @ Pintoo was convicted for committing offences punishable under Sections 302/307/379 IPC. By an order dated 30.09.2013, the appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine `10,000/- under Section 302 IPC; RI for seven years with fine `5000/- under Section 307 IPC and RI for three years under Section 379 IPC. All the sentences were to operate concurrently. CRL.A. 300/2014 Page 1 of 8 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution c...
Tag this Judgment!Parvesh vs.commissioner of Police & Ors
Court: Delhi
$~13 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10908/2017 & CM No.44631/2017 % Date of decision :8. h December, 2017 PARVESH ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Mr. Lal Babu Lalit, Mr. Sunil Kumar and Mr. Brijesh Kumar, Advs. along with the petitioner in person. versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, ASC with Mr. Rhishabh Jetley, Adv. for GNCTD. Mr. H.S. Parihar and Mr. Kuldeep S. Parihar, Avds. for RBI. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE1 This writ petition relates to the issue relating to the cases involving ATM frauds. Amongst the issues flagged, a grievance is made regarding investigation into 18 different instances of fraud at the same ATM.2. It is submitted by the petitioner that similar instances of fraud WP(C)No.10908/2017 Page 1 of 2 at the same ATM deserves to be investigated by the same Investigating Officer or b...
Tag this Judgment!Devendra Kumar Gupta vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
$~ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:28. h November, 2017 Pronounced on:08. h December, 2017 + O.M.P.(T) 5/2017 DEVENDRA KUMAR GUPTA Through : In person. ........ Petitioner versus Through : None. UNION OF INDIA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J...... Respondent 1. This petition is under section 12 and 14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.2. It is alleged on 31.05.2010 a public notice was published in Amar Ujala newspaper for acquisition of land of the petitioner admeasuring 550 square meters in village Kulchandi Tehsil Roorkee for widening of NH58 3. In March 2015 the petitioner was paid land compensation at the rate of 949/- per square meters and on 20.07.2015 he has made a request to the District Magistrate Haridwar to pay a compensation of Rs.3100/- per square meters plus 10% along with 9% interest, have raised dispute. O.M.P.(T) 5/2017 Page 1 of 6 4. On 17.01.2017 the NHAI authorities supplied a copy of letter indicating District...
Tag this Judgment!Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Limited vs.raj Kumar & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-675 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:8. h December, 2017 + MAC. APP. 1230/2012 & CM No.20059/2012 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Advocate versus RAJ KUMAR & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. O.P. Mannie, Advocate for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The insurance company presses the appeal at hand directed against the judgment dated 29.05.2012 of motor accident claims tribunal on the accident claim case (M. No.38A/2012) of the first respondent (the claimant) only to assail the directions about payment of Rs.7,000/- as lawyers fees and Rs.2100/- towards out of pocket expenses to the counsel for the claimant.2. There being no justification for such inclusion, the directions in the award for payment of lawyers fee and out of pocket expenses are set aside.3. By order dated 03.12.2012, the insurer was directed to deposit 50% of the awarded amount (less counsels fee) with u...
Tag this Judgment!Sc Johnson Products Private Limited vs.additional Commissioner of Inco ...
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:27. 10.2017 Pronounced on:08. 12.2017 + W.P.(C) 2697/2015 SC JOHNSON PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED Through: Mr. C.S.Aggarwal, Senior ........ Petitioner Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE ..... Respondent 22(2), NEW DELHI Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate And connected matter: + W.P.(C) 10904/2016 & CM No.42721/2016 (stay) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.The writ petitions are dismissed. For detailed judgment, the decision in W.P.(C) No.2697/2015 dated 08.12.2017 may be referred to. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J DECEMBER08 2017...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Dulare & Anr vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :8. h DECEMBER, 2017 + FAO12012 ..... Appellants Through : Mr.Anshuman Bal, Advocate. RAM DULARE & ANR UNION OF INDIA versus Through : Ms.Shipra Shukla, Advocate for UOI. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(Oral) 1. This First Appeal has been filed under Section 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (hereinafter Tribunal) impugning the judgment of the Tribunal dated 29.08.2011 by which the claim petition filed by the appellants was dismissed. The appeal is contested by the respondent.2. Briefly stated, facts of the case as reflected in the petition are that on 17.02.2009 at about 10.45 p.m. Rakesh Kumar appellants son aged around 22 years while going from Sunhera to Delhi Shahdara railway station in a passenger train No.6SSD sustained fatal injuries while standing on the gate of the train. When the train reached near Behta Hajipur railway station, Distt. Ghaziabad, U.P., due to heavy rush and sud...
Tag this Judgment!Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Limited vs.madhu Monga & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~R-669 & 669A * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:8. h December, 2017 + MAC. APP. 1217/2012 & CM Nos.19722-19723/2012 ANITA BHANDARI & ANR. Through: Nemo. versus MADHU MONGA & ORS. ..... Appellant ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Kavit Tyagi, Adv. with Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. for R-1. Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv. with Ms. Anjali Chawla for R-2. + MAC. APP. 134/2013 & CM No.1390/2013 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY ..... Appellant LIMITED Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate versus MADHU MONGA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Kavit Tyagi, Adv. with Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Madhu Monga (first respondents in these appeals), hereinafter referred to as the claimant, had instituted accident claim case (MACT No.1141/10/08) on 25.07.2008, seeking compensation under MAC APP.1217/2012 & 134/2013 Page 1 of 4 Sections 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on the averments that while riding on the cycle ...
Tag this Judgment!Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.braham Singh & Ors.
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~47 * % + MAC.APP.1077/2017 and C.M. Appl. 44580/2017 Date of Decision:08. h December, 2017 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD...... Petitioner Through: Ms. Prerna Mehta, Advocate versus BRAHAM SINGH & ORS. Through: ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) The appellant has challenged the award dated 26th October, 2017 1. whereby compensation of Rs.8,89,000/- has been awarded to respondents No.1 to 7.2. The accident dated 07th June, 2009 resulted in the death of Ram Wati. The deceased was aged 44 years at the time of the accident and was survived by her husband, four daughters and two sons who filed the claim for compensation before the Claims Tribunal.3. The Claims Tribunal took the minimum wages of Rs.3,934/- per month in respect of an unskilled worker as the income of the deceased, deducted 1/5th towards the personal expenses and applied the multiplier of 14 to compute the loss of dependency as Rs.5,28,72...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs.maruti Suzuki India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA No.906/2011 Reserved on:11. h November 2017 Decided on:7. h December, 2017 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI ....Appellant Through: Mr. Mr. Rahul Chaudhary and Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocates. versus MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Mr. S. Ganesh, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha, Mr. S. Sukumaran, Mr. Anand Sukumar, Mr. Bhuwan Dhoopar, Ms. Roopali Gupta and Mr.Bhupesh Pathak, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH % Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: JUDGMENT0712.2017 1. This is an appeal by the Revenue against the impugned order dated 29th October 2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No.4443/Del/2007 for the AY199495.2. While admitting this appeal on 10th August 2011, the following questions of law were framed for consideration: ITA No.906/2011 Page 1 of 2 Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that on account of duty drawback had not accrued and become payable to the asses...
Tag this Judgment!