Delhi Court March 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.
Shri Deepak Sharma and Ors. Vs.state of Nct of Delhi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
* + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: March 19, 2018 W.P.(C) 2539/2018 & CM104772018 SHRI DEEPAK SHARMA AND ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Kamlakshi Singh and Ms. Saundarya Singh, Advocates versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Advocate for Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel for respondent-GNCTD CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL)... Petitioners are Para-Medical Staff engaged on contract basis with second respondent, who, by way of Representation of 15th December, 2017 (Annexure P-6 colly.) had sought grant of allowances. The grievance of petitioners is that the said Representation has not been decided till date.2. Learned counsel for petitioners relies upon order of 19th November, 2012 (Annexure P-3) of Government of NCT of Delhi, which directs all medical colleges/hospitals/medical institutions under the GNCTD to pay the allowances to Para-Medical Staff engaged on contract basis. It is also the...
V4 Infrastructure Private Ltd vs.jindal Biochem Private Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:19. 03.2018 O.M.P. (COMM) 352/2017 % + V4 INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LTD .....Petitioner Versus JINDAL BIOCHEM PRIVATE LTD .... Respondent AND + O.M.P. (COMM) 353/2017 V4 INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LTD .....Petitioner Versus JINDAL BIOCHEM PRIVATE LTD Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr S.K. Chaturvedi and Mr Amit Sood. : Mr Vikas Kakkar and Mr Vaibhav Tiwari. in OMP (COMM) 353/2017. .... Respondent CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioner (hereafter VIPL) has filed the present petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the Act) impugning an arbitral award dated 20.05.2017 (hereafter the impugned award) rendered by the Sole Arbitrator, O.M.P. (COMM) 352/2017 & 353/2017 Page 1 of 9 Justice M.L. Mehta, Retired (hereafter the Arbitral Tribunal). The impugned award was rendered in the context of two Space Buyer Ag...
State (Gnct of Delhi) vs.waseem Akram Butt
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:19. h March, 2018 CRL.L.P. 272/2017 and Crl. M.A. No.7630/2017 (Delay) STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) ........ Petitioner Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP for State with SI Sachin Kumar, PS Amar Colony. versus WASEEM AKRAM BUTT Represented by: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 26th April, 2016 acquitting the respondent for offence punishable under SectionsIPC giving benefit of doubt to the respondent.2. Case of the prosecutrix in the complaint was that she met the respondent at a common friends place on 31st December, 2009. Respondent took her mobile number from the common friend and started sending her messages. Within a weeks time he insisted her to meet him but she avoided. After sometime he again met her and proposed to marry. She immediately rejected his proposal as she hardly knew him. However, the respondent insiste...
Torhi Singh vs.bses Yamuna Power Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: March 19, 2018 + TORHI SINGH W.P.(C) 2560/2018 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Apurp Lal and Mr.Daleep Singh, Advocates versus BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Sandeep Prabhakar and Mr.Vikas Mehta, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) 1. Vide office order of 23rd January, 2013 (Annexure P-4), petitioner has been granted time bound promotion scale from 12th May, 2002 and 1st May, 2010. Not satisfied with the impugned office order (Annexure P-4), petitioner had made a representation (Annexure P-8 Colly) on 30th January, 2015 which reveals that petitioner had earlier also represented on 12th February, 2014. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that there is no response to petitioners representation (Annexure P-8 Colly).2. In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition with direction to respondent to pass a speaking order on petitioner...
Deepak Kashyap vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
$~R-117 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 793/2017 DEEPAK KASHYAP ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Kaveeta Wadia and Mr.Shashank Tripathi, Advocate. STATE versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for State CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA ORDER1903.2018 % Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 20th May 2017, passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS-2 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts in Sessions Case No.111/2012 arising out of FIR. No.208/2012 registered at Police Station (PS) Burari convicting the Appellant for the offences under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife Ms. Radha (the deceased) and for the offence under Section 323 IPC for causing injury on Smt. Janki Devi (PW-5) who was trying to save her daughter Radha.2. The appeal is also directed against the order on sentence dated 22nd May 2017, whereby for the offence under Section 302 IPC the Appellant was Crl.A.793/2017 Page 1 of 16 sentenced to impri...
G Raju vs.north Delhi Municipal Corporation and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
$~112 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment :19. H March, 2018 + W.P.(C) 2588/2018 G RAJU Through: Mr. Vijay Babbar, Advocate. ........ Petitioner versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR. Through: Ms. Puja Kalra, Advocate for NDMC. ........ RESPONDENTS Ms. Isha Khanna, Advocate for R-2. SI Bajrang (D-6013), PS-Karol Bagh. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G. S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CM APPLN. No.10628/2018 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. W. P. (C) 2588/2018 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and under the Street Vendors Act, 2014 filed by the petitioner. The petitioner claims to be a regular street vendor and is vending at Site No.13/9, WEA, Padam Singh Road, Near J&K Emporium, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. Under the threat of being removed has led to filing of the present writ petition. W.P.(C) 2588/2018 Page 1 of 3 2. Learned ...
Ct/Gd Mazhar Raja vs.union of India and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
$~12. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6399/2017 CT/GD MAZHAR RAJA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Ujjwal Pandey, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Waize Ali Noor, Advocate for Mr. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC alongwith Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, DC (Law), CRPF. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI % ORDER1903.2018 1. The petitioner seeks directions to the respondents/CRPF to consider his case for appointment to the post of SI/GD through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination, 2014 (in short, LDCE) with all consequential benefits.2. A brief glance at the facts of the case is considered necessary. On 01.05.2004, the petitioner was inducted in the CRPF as Constable/GD in the General category. In June, 2010, the respondents issued SO No.01/2010, proposing to conduct LDCE for appointment to the post of SI/GD in the CRPF. In October, 2011, the aforesaid SO was amended vide Addendum dated 11.10.2011, indi...
Jyotsna Mishra vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
* + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: March 19, 2018 W.P.(C) 2536/2018 JYOTSNA MISHRA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. R.S. Mishra and Mr. Anand Mishra, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. A.K. Gautam, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. Digvijay Rai, Advocate for respondent-AAI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Impugned order of 12th December, 2017 (Annexure-F) is not in compliance with this Courts order of 3rd November, 2017 (Annexure-E) vide which fourth respondent was directed to pass a speaking order on petitioners Representation of 22nd February, 2017 (Annexure-D colly.).2. The stand of petitioner in the Representation (Annexure-D colly.) is that a composite promotion letter of 31st August, 2015 (Annexure-A) vide which petitioner was also promoted was displayed on Social Media only and was neither officially served upon her nor was it sent to her parent unit and so, petitioner could not join on the promoted pos...
Shiv Giri vs.north Delhi Municipal Corporation and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:19. h March, 2018 $~114 * % + W.P.(C) 2590/2018 SHIV GIRI NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR. Through: Mr. Vijay Babbar, Advocate. versus ........ Petitioner ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Puja Kalra, Advocate for North MCD. Mr. Devvrat and Mr. Rizwan, Advocates for respondent No.2. 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 and under the Street Vendors Act, 2014 filed by the petitioner. The petitioner claims to be a regular street vendor and is in the business of selling readymade garments and vending at Site 13/8, WEA, Padam Singh Road, Near J&K Emporium, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents not to remove him or dispossess him from the existing site till the completion of the survey or provide an alternate site to him.2. Learned counsel for the respon...
Vedanta Limited (Successor to Cairn India Limited) vs.principal Commis ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-19-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:19. 03.2018 + + ITA3032018, C.M. APPL.10257/2018 ITA3102018, C.M. APPL.10604/2018 VEDANTA LIMITED (SUCCESSOR TO CAIRN INDIA LIMITED) ..... Appellant versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9, NEW DELHI ..... Respondent Present: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Prakash Kumar, Advocates for appellant. Sh. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.Admit. The following questions of law arise for consideration: (i) Did the Tribunal err in law in regard to disallowances made under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter the 1961 Act]. read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Income Tax Rules, in the facts and circumstances?. (ii) Did the Tribunal fall into error in holding that the transactions between the assessee and its Associated Enterprise (AE) had to be disregarded for the purpose of Arms Length ITA3032018 ...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »