Delhi Court February 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.
Rollatainers Ltd. Vs.commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2017
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:12. 01.2017 Pronounced on:16. 02.2017 ITA1662004 ROLLATAINERS LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Kavita Jha and Sh. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Advocates. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT This is an assessees appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax % 1. Act, 1961 (the Act) against the consolidated order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) (Delhi Bench) dated 30.07.2003. The following questions of law were framed for consideration, at the time of admission of the appeal: i. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act had to be computed by apportioning the profits of the entire business in the ratio of export turnover to total turnover of the entire busines...
Kanhaiya Lal & Anr. Vs.nathi Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: February 10, 2017 Judgment Delivered on: February 16, 2017 + RSA272017 KANHAIYA LAL & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr.Narender Malawaliya, Advocate versus ..... Respondent Through: None. NATHI LAL CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI JUDGMENT RSA272017, CM Nos.2752/2017 & 2753/2017 1. The appellant No.1 Sh.Kanhaiya Lal is the son and appellant No.2 Smt.Raj Kumar is the daughter-in-law of the respondent Sh.Nathi Lal. The appellants are aggrieved by the concurrent judgments of the Courts below i.e. judgment dated 9th January, 2014 passed by the learned Trial Court and judgment dated 29th November, 2014 passed by the learned First Appellate Court whereby, by way of mandatory injunction, the appellants/defendants have been directed to vacate the first floor of the property bearing No.15/291, Dakshin Puri, New Delhi-110062 admeasuring 22 sq.yds.2. This Regular Second Appeal has been preferred after a delay of 617 days i...
Bhuban Chand Kala vs.vinay Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2017
$~3 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA912017 & C.M. No.3037-38/2017 BHUBAN CHAND KALA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ranjeet Singh with Mr. Joolie Kataria, Advocates with the appellant in person. versus VINAY KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S.K. Mittal with Mr. Dilip Dubey, Advocates with the defendant in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER1602.2017 1. Pursuant to the order dated 31.1.2017, both the parties are present in court.2. On the last date of hearing, it had been enquired from learned counsels for the parties if they would be ready and willing to negotiate a settlement with each other. Learned counsel for the appellant had stated that he wanted to obtain instructions. Today, he states that that appellant is ready and willing to negotiate a settlement with the respondent and offers to pay him the principal amount of Rs.4,39,000/-. The said suggestion is however unacceptable to the respondent.3. Learned counsel for the respondent states that his c...
Om Parkash vs.sri Kishan & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2017
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 16, 2017 OM PARKASH RSA192012 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Umesh Yadav, Advocate. versus SRI KISHAN & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.B.D.Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI JUDGMENT (Oral) 1. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by the appellant/plaintiff assailing the judgment dated 31st October, 2011 whereby the First Appellate Court allowed the appeal bearing RCA No.2/2010 preferred by the respondents/defendants against the judgment and decree 29th May, 2010 passed by learned Trial Court in Civil Suit No.17/09.2. As a result of the impugned judgment by the First Appellate Court, the suit of the appellant/plaintiff which was decreed by the learned Trial Court, stands dismissed.3. By filing the Civil Suit No.17/2009, the appellant/plaintiff sought a decree of declaration and injunction challenging the two Wills executed by his father in...
Raj Rani Chaudhary & Ors vs.umesh Atri
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2017
$~A- * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: February 16, 2017 + RC.REV. 265/2016 & CM Nos. 18326-18327/2016 RAJ RANI CHAUDHARY & ORS ........ Petitioners Through Mr.D.R.Bhatia, Advocate UMESH ATRI versus Through Mr.Praveen Chauhan, Mr. Abhishek Gupta and Ms.Arpita, Advocates. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. This revision petition is filed under section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the DRC Act) seeking to impugn the eviction order dated 03.03.2016 passed by the Additional Rent Controller (hereinafter referred to as the ARC).2. Respondent/landlord had filed an eviction petition under section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act for property being No.392, Leela Ram Market, Masjid Moth, New Delhi which was let out by late Pandit Sh.Leela Ram. The title of the respondent is traced through a family settlement dated 31.03.1971 between the LRs of Late Pt.Leela Ram and a family settlement dated ...
Harinder Pal Singh and Ors vs.guru Teg Bahadur Polytechnic Institute a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2017
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.11316/2015 16th February, 2017 Through: Mr. Nikhilesh Kumar, Advocate. HARINDER PAL SINGH AND ORS GURU TEG BAHADUR POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND ORS. versus ........ Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Advocate for R-1 and 2. Mr. Devesh Singh, ASC R/GNCTD. Mr. Anil Soni, Advocate for R- 4/AICTE. for CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain the present petition because the jurisdiction will be of the concerned District Judge in view of Section 32 (d) of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1971, and which aspect has been considered by this Court in detail in the judgment passed on 30.1.2017 in the case of Arshpreet Kaur Vs. Guru Teg Bahadur Polytechnic Institute and Ors. in W.P. (C) No.811/2017, and which judgment reads as under:-"W.P.(C) No.11316/2015 Page 1 of 5 1. This writ petition under Article...
Ashok Kumar Singh vs.university of Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % ASHOK KUMAR SINGH W.P.(C) No.7371/2016 16th February, 2017 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Amit Gupta and Mr. Anant A. Pavgi and Ms. Mansi Kukreja, Advocates. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. M.J.S. Rupal and Ms. Simran Jeet, Advocates for R- 1/University of Delhi. Mr. Rajiv B. Advocate for R-2. Ms. Vibha Mahajan Seth, Advocate for R-3 to 5. Samaiyar, 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 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner impugns the reports dated 30.6.2015 & 12.2.2016 submitted by the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) of the respondent No.2/Dayal Singh Evening College. The ICC was constituted under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred W.P.(C) No.7371/2016 Page 1 of 13 to as the Act), on account of ...
Charanjeet Singh vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2017
$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY16 2017 + CRL.REV.P. 22/2017 & Crl.M.A.418/2017 CHARANJEET SINGH ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.M.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate. VERSUS STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG Through : Mr.Kamal Kr.Ghei, APP for State/R-1 Mr.Ikrant Sharma with Mr.Ravi Bhargava, Advocates for R-2. S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Present Revision Petition has been preferred by the petitioner to challenge the legality and correctness of orders dated 27.10.2016 and 29.12.2016 by which he was directed to deposit `1.25 crores and his request to deposit the title documents of the property in lieu of `1 crore was declined.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Undisputedly, the petitioner is facing proceedings in case FIR No.0385/2016 under Sections 420/4IPC registered at Police Station Gandhi Nagar. Application earlier moved under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Crl.Rev.P.22/2017 Page 1 of 2 was dism...
Iitl-Nimbus vs.uoi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2017
Through : Sh. P. Roychaudhuri, Sr. Standing Counsel. ........ RESPONDENTS * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8085/2014, C.M. APPL.18876/2014 RAJESH PROJECTS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Reserved on:16. 01.2017 Decided on:16. 02.2017 Through : Sh. Prakash Kumar and Ms. Rashmi Singh, Advocates. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)-II AND ORS. + W.P.(C) 7682/2015 AJAY ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. ........ Petitioner Through : Sh. Harish Malhotra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Vidhi Goel and Ms. Shagun Parashar, Advocates. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) AND ORS. Versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Sh. Jasmeet Singh and Sh. Nitesh Shrivastava, Advocates. Sh. P. Roychaudhuri, Sr. Standing Counsel. + W.P.(C) 10896/2015 IITL-NIMBUS, THE HYDE PARK, NOIDA ........ Petitioner Through : Sh. Neil Chatterjee, Advocate, for Sh. Debesh Panda, Advocate. Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Sh. Jasmeet Singh and Sh. Nitesh Shrivastava, Advocates. Sh. ...
Meena vs.raj Kumar Goel & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CM(M) 243/2015 Date of decision:16. 02.2017 $~A-10 * % + MEENA Through Mr.Manish Bansal, Mr.Robin Bansal ........ Petitioner and Ms.Aarti Tyagi, Advocates. versus RAJ KUMAR GOEL & ANR Through Mr.B.K.Sood ........ RESPONDENTS and Mr.Sandeep Thukral, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. By the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to impugn the order dated 30.01.2015 by which an application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Order XXIII Rule 1 CPC was partly allowed and the liberty was granted to the petitioner to file a fresh suit with respect to the relief of permanent injunction. The court held that there can be no occasion to consider the question of granting liberty with respect to any other reliefs as no such other reliefs have been sought in the present suit.2. The petitioner/plaintiff who is the sister of the respondents filed the present suit a...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »