Delhi Court March 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.
r.k. Dabas & Ors vs.government of Nct of Delhi & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-09-2017
$~6 * + W.P.(C) 11724/2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision :9. h March, 2017 ........ Petitioners R.K. DABAS & ORS. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. Through Mr. Sarvesh Bisaria, Advocate versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Akshay Chaudhary, Advocate for Mr. Rahan Duggal, Standing Counsel for GNCTD for R-1 & R-2 Ms. Avnish Ahlawat with Ms. Latika Choudhary and Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Advocates for R-3/SCERT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): The petitioners, four in number, in this writ petition have impugned order dated 16.03.2015 whereby OA No.4222/2010 has been dismissed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter Tribunal for short).2. The petitioners are retired officers of the State Council of Education Research and Training (SCERT).3. The petitioners had filed the aforesaid OA seeking direction to the SCERT to pay them pension in terms of unamended Rule 67 o...
Gvk Power (Goindwal Sahib) Ltd vs.punj Llyod Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
% + + + THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:08. 03.2017 FAO(OS) 222/2015 & CM75782015 FAO(OS) 223/2015 & CM75812015 FAO(OS) 224/2015 & CM75842015 PUNJ LLOYD LTD ..... Appellant versus GVK POWER (GOINDWAL SAHIB) LIMITED ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case:-"For the Appellant For the Respondent : Mr Rajiv Nayar and Mr A. S. Chandhiok, Senior Advocates with Mr Rishi Agrawala, Mr Akshay R., Mr Karan Luthra, Mr Mayank Bamniyal and Mr Ritesh Kumar : Mr Kapil Sibal and Mr Parag P Tripathi, Senior Advocates with Ms Kanika Singh, Ms Heena Khan, Mr Arunabh Ganguli and Mr Salim A. Imamdar + + + FAO(OS) 221/2015 & CM752627/2015 FAO(OS) 231/2015 & CM771516/2015 FAO(OS) 232/2015 & CM771718/2015 GVK POWER (GOINDWAL SAHIB) LTD versus PUNJ LLYOD LTD ..... Appellant ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case:-"For the Appellant For the Respondent : Mr Kapil Sibal and Mr Parag P Tripathi, Senior Advocates with Ms Kanika Singh, Ms Heena Khan, Mr Arunabh Ga...
Saroj Aggarwal & Anr vs.shakuntala Aggarwal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :20. h October, 2016 Decided on :8. h March, 2017 + FAO(OS) 150/2015 & CM Nos. 5860/2015 (for stay) & 17825/2015 ( under Order 41 Rule 2 for placing on record additional grounds) SAROJ AGGARWAL & ANR ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Tejas Karia, Mr.Akhil Anand & Mr.Siddharth Agarwal, Advs. versus SHAKUNTALA AGGARWAL ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Rajesh Gupta, Mr.Harpreet Singh Mr.Pranjal Saran, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT % INDIRA BANERJEE, J.1. This appeal is against an order dated 19/03/2015 passed by the Ld. Single Judge, in an application filed by the respondent, being the defendant, in the Partition Suit being CS (OS) No.617 of 2011 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure whereby the learned Single FAO(OS) NO.150/2015 1 Judge granted permission to the respondent to occupy the 1st floor of the property being No.12 Road No.42 We...
Raj Kumar Khandelwal and Anr vs.inderjit Singh and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
$~2. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA1032017 1. RAJ KUMAR KHANDELWAL AND ANR ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Prasoon Kumar and Ms. Mansi Agarwal, Advocates with appellant No.1 in person. versus INDERJIT SINGH AND ORS Through: None ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % The appellants/plaintiffs are aggrieved by the judgment dated ORDER0803.2017 22.10.2016 passed by the trial court, dismissing their suit for permanent and mandatory injunction and for damages to the tune of Rs.6,40,000/- instituted against the respondents/defendants premised on a Property Development Agreement dated 22.12.2011 in respect of a residential premises owned by the respondents situated in Inderpuri.2. Counsel for the appellants has addressed arguments at some length. The Court has expressed an opinion that he has not been able to point out any illegality, arbitrariness or infirmity in the impugned judgment for interference in appeal.3. At this stage, counsel for the appellant...
Venu Charitable Society and Anr. Vs.director General of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:01. 12.2016 Pronounced on:08. 03.2017 + W.P.(C) 7147/2012 VENU CHARITABLE SOCIETY AND ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha and Sh. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Advocates. Versus DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Sh. P. Roychoudhuri with Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The petitioner is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and formed with the objective of rendering comprehensive eye care services, inclusive of all forms of ophthalmic services. To further its objects, it established the Venu Eye Institute and Research Centre in Delhi, with five satellite hospitals and seven vision centers in Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Rajasthan. Its claim is that its objects, for assessment years 2005-2006to 2009-2010 were charitable in terms of Section...
Li & Fung India Pvt. Ltd. Vs.asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON:08. 03.2017 W.P. (C) 11596/2016, CM APPL.45660-61/2016 LI & FUNG INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Jain and Mr. Manish Kant, Advocates. Versus ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia with Mr. Puneet Rai, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by a show cause notice issued by the respondents (hereafter called the Revenue) and argues that it is beyond the scope of the remit by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and that the respondents are seeking to re-open issues that have attained finality in judicial orders.2. The... Petitioner-company is engaged in the business of providing support services for sourcing of garments, handicrafts, leather products, etc. to its associated enterprises. It charges a markup of 5% on its total ...
Icici Bank Ltd. Vs.kapil Puri & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: October 03, 2016 Judgment delivered on: March 08, 2017 + W.P. (C) 10765/2015 & CM. No.27682/2015 (for Stay) ICICI BANK LTD. Through: Mr. Abhinav Vasisht, Sr. Adv. with Mr. E.R. ........ Petitioner Kumar, Ms. Raveena Rai & Mr. Abhiram Naik, Advs. Versus KAPIL PURI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Kamal Mehta with Mr. Sunil Choudhary, Advs. for R-1 and R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MS JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO V. KAMESWAR RAO, J JUDGMENT1 The challenge in this petition by the ICICI Bank Limited is to the order dated June 12, 2015 of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) passed in Appeal No.196/2015, whereby the appeal filed by the respondents 1 and 2 challenging the orders of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) dated May 9, 2014 and February 23, 2015 directing respondents 1 and 2, if they will go out, they will inform the Tribunal and seek its permission as well, in other words, restraining res...
Sushil Kumar Aggarwal vs.general Manager Northern Railway & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
$~6. * + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA7542015 SUSHIL KUMAR AGGARWAL Through: Mr. S.W. Haider, Advocate ..... Appellant versus GENERAL MANAGER NORTHERN RAILWAY & ANR Through: Mr. Shailender Saini, Advocate with Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Advocate ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % The appellant/plaintiff is aggrieved by the judgment dated 04.02.2015 ORDER0803.2017 passed by the learned trial court, dismissing his suit for declaration, permanent and mandatory injunction instituted against the respondents/Northern Railways on the ground that the same is not maintainable in view of non-compliance of Section 80 CPC and under Order VII Rule 11(a) CPC on the ground that the plaint does not disclose a cause of action.2. After addressing arguments at some length, learned counsel for the appellant states that he may be permitted to withdraw the present appeal while reserving the right of the appellant to pursue an application submitted by him to the responden...
Dharamvir Singh vs.sls. Dav Public School and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.7560/2010 Reserved on:22. d February, 2017 Pronounced on:8. h March, 2017 Ms. Sonia A. Menon, Advocate. ........ Petitioner + % DHARAMVIR SINGH Through: versus SLS. DAV PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Satyakam, ASC for GNCTD with Mr. Naveen Jakhar, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J1 By this writ petition under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner impugns the order of the Delhi School Tribunal (DST) dated 6.8.2010 whereby the DST dismissed the application for condonation of delay in re-filing of the appeal. The delay in re-filing of the appeal is of around seven months.2. Ordinarily, the courts are liberal in considering the applications for condonation of delay in re-filing of an appeal, however, peculiar facts of this case persuade this court to reject the challenge laid in this Court to t...
Sushil Kumar Sharma vs.state of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2017
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision : March 08th, 2017 CRL.A. 200/2002 SUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA ..... Appellant Through Mr.K.B. Andley, Adv. with Mr.M. Shamikh , Adv. & Mr.M.L. Yadav, Adv. versus STATE OF DELHI Through Mr.Sudershan Joon, APP for the ..... Respondent State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI JUDGMENT P.S.TEJI, J1 The present appeal has been filed being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 27.02.2002 convicting the appellant under Section 392 read with 397 IPC and order on sentence dated 28.02.2002 vide which the appellant was sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under Section 392 read with 397 IPC. In default of payment of fine, the appellant has been ordered to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month.2. The factual matrix emerging from the record is that on 13.07.1997, an information was received in the police station vide Crl.A. No.200/2002 Page 1 of 12 DD No.28A regardin...