Delhi Court January 2018 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.
Raj Kumar Srivastava vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: January 29, 2018 + W.P.(C) 6922/2017 RAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA versus ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Vibhakar Mishra, Advocate UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC for respondents No.1 & 2 Mr. Kamal Mehta, Advocate for respondent No.3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) C.M.3219/2018 (stay) Upon hearing, this Court finds that instead of deciding this application, main petition itself can be heard today itself. Accordingly, the date of 7th March, 2018, fixed for final hearing of main petition, is preponed for today. W.P.(C) 6922/2017 & C.Ms.28774/2017 & 3219/2018 (stay) 1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition and the application are taken up today for final hearing.2.... Petitioner is a retired District Judge, who had applied for the post of Insurance Ombudsman in pursuance of Advertisement of September, 2012 and upon his selection, he was appointed...
Madan Lal vs.union of India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment:29. h January, 2018 + W.P.(C) 8747/2016 MADAN LAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Ankit Verma, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Siddharth Panda, Advocate for respondent-LAC/L&B Department. Mr.Nikhil Goel, Advocate respondent/DDA. for CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings in respect of land of the petitioner comprised in Khasra No.976 min to the extent of 12 bighas 01 biswas, situated in the revenue estate of village Bahapur, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the subject land) stands lapsed in view of Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 2013 Act), as neit...
Union of India vs.m/s Jia Lall Kishori Lall pvt.ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~OS-36 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. 01.2018 + O.M.P. (COMM) 222/2017 UNION OF INDIA ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Saurabh Chaddha, Adv. versus M/S JIA LALL KISHORI LALL PVT.LTD..... Respondent Through Mr.Arvind Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. Present petition is filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as The Act) seeking to set aside the Award of the Sole Arbitrator dated 5.12.2016 and the corrected Award dated 6.12.2016, 18.12.2016, 19.12.2016 and 9.1.2017. The respondent is a contractor engaged by the Public Works Department for construction activities. The petitioner called bids to carry out construction of the bridge and widening of the roads at four lane bridge over Bara Pula Nala at Ring Road near Sarai Kale Khan, New Delhi. Pursuant to the bidding the contract was awarded to the respondent. An Agreement dated 8.7.2005 (in short the said Agreeme...
Northern Railways Out Agency (Noida) vs.divisional Railway Manager Nor ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: January 04, 2018 Judgment delivered on: January 29, 2018 + W.P.(C) 5746/2016, CM No.23688/2016 NORTHERN RAILWAYS OUT AGENCY (NOIDA) ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. V.K. Shukla, Adv. with Ms. Nupur Shukla, Adv. versus DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER NORTHERN RAILWAY AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Pinky Anand, ASG with Mr. Jagjit Singh (Senior Standing Counsel), Ms. Snidha Mehra & Ms. Kirti Dua, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT V. KAMESWAR RAO, J1 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: It is therefore most respectfully prayed as this Honble Court may graciously be pleased to: a) b) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction quashing the order dated 03.06.2016 numbered as SCD- 134-93-Pt-93-Noda-2016 passed by respondent No.1. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing the respondents to renew the parcel bookin...
Commissioner of Income Tax Del vs.mansarover Investment Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~28, 29 & 32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. 01.2018 + GTA12005 COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX versus M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASING GTA22006 COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX versus M/S STAINLESS INVESTMENTS LTD. GTA32007 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL versus ..... Appellant ..... Respondent .....Appellant ..... Respondent ..... Appellant MANSAROVER INVESTMENT LTD. ..... Respondent Present: Mr. Deepak Anand, Jr. Standing counsel for appellant. Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha and Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Advocates for respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL) % The sole question for consideration in these appeals formulated on 18.11.2005, is as follows: Whether the ITAT was correct in law in quashing the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer under Section 16 (1) of the Gift Tax Act on the ground that condition precedent for reassessment of the proceedings unde...
Billoo Singh vs.rattan Singh & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~2 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:29. h January, 2018 EFA(OS) 36/2016 & CM No.48079/2016 BILLOO SINGH RATTAN SINGH & ORS ..... Appellant Through: Mr. M.S. Ahuluwalia, Advocate versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Siddharth Bambha, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) This appeal under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966 read with Order XXI Rule 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns order dated 8.12.2016 passed by the Execution Court in Ex.P. No.306/2014 and in EA No.508/2016.2. The appellant submits that the decree dated 17.2.2014 in CS(OS) No.61/2013 was a non-executable decree and hence, execution application is not maintainable. In support, our attention was drawn to para 7 of the order dated 17.02.2014, which records that the counsels were informed that if they want an executable decree for partition in terms of the Memoran...
Ravinder Singh and Ors. Vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~20 * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:29. h January, 2018 + W.P.(C) 5214/2015 RAVINDER SINGH & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. N. Prabhakar and Mr. Dhruv Sharma, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Siddharth Panda, Advocate for LAC/L&B. Mr. Ajay Verma, Senior Standing Counsel for DDA with Mr. Kush Sharma, Ms. Diviani Khanna and Mr. Ekant Luthra, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioners seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings initiated under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with respect to land of the petitioners comprised in Khasra No.227, situated in the revenue estate of village Lado Sarai, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Subject Land) stand lapsed in view of Section 24 (2) ...
Amit Katyal vs.union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9449/2017 & CM No.38432/2017 % Date of Decision:29. h January, 2018 AMIT KATYAL Through: Mr. Ranjeet Raut, Adv. ........ Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Rohilla, Adv. for R-1 & 2. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE1 The petitioner in this case is a promoter Director in several companies engaged in the real estate business which forms part of the Krrish Group. On 24th April, 2010, the petitioner was appointed as a Director of M/s Arnav Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. The writ petition states that the petitioner does not have any shareholding in the company and was appointed in connection with a collaboration agreement in respect of some lands offered by this company for being included in a licensed colony being developed by Brahma City Pvt. Ltd. (earlier known as Krrish Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.).2. The petitioner...
Gmr Infrastructure Ltd vs.associated Broadcasting Company Pvt Ltd & Or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:22. d August, 2017 Decided on:29. h January, 2018 IA43512016 (u/O XXXIX R12 CPC) in CS(OS) 165/2016 GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD ..... Plaintiff Represented by: Mr. Abhinav Vasisht, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Abhinav Agnihotri, Ms. Priya Chauhan, Mr. Sourabh Gupta, Advs. versus ASSOCIATED BROADCASTING COMPANY PVT LTD & ORS Represented by: Mr. J.P. Sengh, Sr. Adv. with ..... Defendants Mr. Buddy A Ranganadhan, Ms. Manisha Mehta, Advs. for D-1 to 9. Mr. Raunak Jain, Adv. for D-10. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 Through IA43512016, (under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC), GMR Infrastructure Ltd., hereafter referred to as plaintiff, seeks to restrain defendants, their representative, employees, agents, assignees, or any other person acting on their behalf or at their behest from re-broadcasting or uploading, in any manner, in any TV channel/Website owned, operated or controlled by the defendants, the story concerning the plaintiff, which was b...
Commissioner of Gift Tax vs.m/s Stainless Investments Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
$~28, 29 & 32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:29. 01.2018 + GTA12005 COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX versus M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASING GTA22006 COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX versus M/S STAINLESS INVESTMENTS LTD. GTA32007 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL versus ..... Appellant ..... Respondent .....Appellant ..... Respondent ..... Appellant MANSAROVER INVESTMENT LTD. ..... Respondent Present: Mr. Deepak Anand, Jr. Standing counsel for appellant. Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha and Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Advocates for respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL) % The sole question for consideration in these appeals formulated on 18.11.2005, is as follows: Whether the ITAT was correct in law in quashing the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer under Section 16 (1) of the Gift Tax Act on the ground that condition precedent for reassessment of the proceedings unde...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »