Delhi Court January 2019 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2019 Page 44 of about 755 results (0.022 seconds)Bharti Infratel Limited vs.deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Anoth ...
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.2036/2016 Date of decision:15. h January, 2019 BHARTI INFRATEL LIMITED ........ Petitioner Through Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Gaurav Jain, Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal and Ms. Deepika Agarwal, Advocates. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel, Mr. Deepak Anand & Mr. Piyush Goyal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.: Bharti Infratel Limited (Petitioner/BIL, for short) by this writ petition impugns legality and validity of notice for re-assessment dated 31st March, 2015 issued under Section 148 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act', for short) for the Assessment Year 2008-09. BIL has also challenged the order dated 23rd February, 2016 passed by the Assessing Officer, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(2), the first respondent to the writ p...
Tag this Judgment!Asian Cargo Movers vs.punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
$~51 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 13968/2018 & CM No.54686/2018 ASIAN CARGO MOVERS ........ Petitioner Through: Mr Siddharth Chopra and Mr Pradeep Mahajan, Mr Sudhir Mahajan and Mr Aditya Awasthi, Advocates. versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ..... Respondent Through: Mrs Nishi Chaudhary, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER1501.2019 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 as under: The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying a. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondent Bank to give the details of the Compulsory OTS Scheme as proposed by the Respondent Bank. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondent Bank to accept the proposal made by the... Petitioners in terms of the aforesaid Compulsory OTS Scheme as proposed by the Respondent Bank. b.2. The principal grievance of the petitioner is that his proposal for One Time Settlement (OTS) of dues owed to respondent no.1 (PNB) W.P. ...
Tag this Judgment!Salman vs.the State (Delhi Admn) Delhi & Anr.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 16, 2019 CRL.M.C. 199/2019 & Crl.M.A.851/2019 SALMAN Through: Mr. Junet Alam, Advocate ........ Petitioner Versus THE STATE ( DELHI ADMN) DELHI & ANR. Through: Mr. .....Respondents Izhar Ahmad, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with ASI Hawa Singh, P.S. Nihal Vihar, Delhi Mr. Mohd. Tarbrez, Advocate with respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.22/2015, under Sections 498-A/4of IPC, registered at police station Nihal Vihar, Delhi is sought on the basis of mediated Settlement of 18th July, 2018 (Annexure -C) reached between the parties through Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State submits that is the complainant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so by ASI Hawa Singh on the basis of identity proof produced by her. respondent No.2, present in the Court Respondent...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Poonam Bhanot vs.virender Sharma & Ors
Court: Delhi
$~OS-10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:15. 01.2019 + CS(OS) 587/2017 SMT. POONAM BHANOT ..... Plaintiff Through Mr.K.K Rohatgi, Adv. versus VIRENDER SHARMA & ORS Through Mr.Prabhjit ..... Defendants Jauhar, Ms.Rosemary Raju, Ms.Upasana Goel and Ms.Aishwarya, Advs. for D-1 Ms.Bhavna Arora, Adv. for D-2 to 4 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) IA No.8668/2018 1. This application is filed by defendant No.1 under Order 7 Rule 11B & D of CPC1908for rejection of the plaint. Present suit is filed by the plaintiff for partition of the suit properties being Flat No.203, K1Building, 412-Gurgaon Mehrauli Road-Sector 14, Gurgaon Haryana; A- 12, Jhilmil Industrial Area, G.T. Road Shahadra, Delhi and plot No.18, Block No.D-14A, Model Town, Delhi-110009.2. By the present application it has been pleaded that in the Memo of Parties, the plaintiff and defendants No.2 to 5 have admitted that they are not in possession of the suit properties and that ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sheela (Registered Owner) vs.smt. Meena Sharma and Ors.
Court: Delhi
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:15. h January, 2019 + MAC.APP. 137/2016 & CM APPL. 5098/2016 SMT. SHEELA (REGISTERED OWNER) ...Appellant Through: Mr. Kamal Kant Jha, Advocate with Mr. Siddharth Jha, Mr. Krishna Kumar and Mr. Prabhakar Thakur, Advocates. versus 1. SMT. MEENA SHARMA W/o Late Sh. Surender Sharma 2. KM. SUNAINA SHARMA D/o Late Sh. Surender Sharma 3. KM. SHIVANI SHARMA D/o Late Sh. Surender Sharma 4. MASTER BAIBHAV SHARMA S/o Late Sh. Surender Sharma 5. SMT. DRAPATI DEVI W/o Late Sh. Ram Avtar 6. PRADEEP CHAUDHARY (DRIVER) 7. SHRI NARESH (SUBSEQUENT OWNER) 8. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. (INSURER) ...... RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Advocate with Mr. Amit Gaur, Advocate for R-8. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA MAC.APP. 137/2016 & CM APPL. 5098/2016 Page 1 of 7 I. S. MEHTA, J.JUDGMENT1 The appellant has challenged the impugned award in Suit No.5dated 07.09.2015 passed by the Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Singh PO, MACT-02, (Central) Delhi ...
Tag this Judgment!Sonu vs.the State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
$~1 to 4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + BAIL APPLN. 960/2018 Judgment delivered on:15. 01.2019 JITENDER versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 1204/2018 RAJA versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 1208/2018 RAMESH CHAUHAN versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 1229/2018 SONU THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Mr. Ashwini Kumar, Mr. Pawan Kumar and Ms. Garima Verma, Advs. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioners : For the Respondent : Ms. Kusum Dhalla, Addl. PP for the State with SI Bharat Singh BAIL APPLN. 960/2018 & OTHER CONNECTED MATTERS Page 1 of 3 CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1501.2019 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.93/2018 under Sections 354/354-B/323/506/5of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Stat...
Tag this Judgment!Roland Corporation vs.sandeep Jain
Court: Delhi
$~23 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS(COMM) 565/2018, IAs No.4560/2007 & IA No.8018/2007 (both u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC), IA No.17065/2018 (u/S151CPC) & CC (COMM) No.6/2018 ROLAND CORPORATION ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Vibhav Mittal & Mr. Pundreek Dwivedi, Advs. Versus SANDEEP JAIN ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Vihan Dang & Ms. Kavya CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW Mammen, Advs. ORDER1501.2019 % IA No.543/2019 (of the plaintiff under Order XV-A CPC as applicable to Commercial Suits) 1. The plaintiff in this suit, already listed on 10th April, 2019 for hearing final arguments, seeks Case Management Hearing.2. 3. The counsel for the defendant appears on advance notice. I have enquired from the counsel for the plaintiff as to what directions are required at this stage in the Case Management Hearing, even if Case Management Hearing is permitted to be held at this stage.4. The counsel for the plaintiff states that a direction is sought for limiting ...
Tag this Judgment!Master Utkarsh Raj Through: His Mother & Natural Guardian Smt. Sangita ...
Court: Delhi
$~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:15. h January, 2019 + W.P.(C) 6147/2018 MASTER UTKARSH RAJ THROUGH: HIS MOTHER & NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. SANGITA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Harkirat Sawhney, Adv. versus THE REGIONAL OFFICER (CBSE) AND ANR. Through: Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. for ........ RESPONDENTS R-1 Ms. Rashmi Bansal and Mr. Abdullah Tanveer, Advs. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR % JUDGMENT (ORAL) The petitioner Utkarsh Raj is a Class XII student of the 1. Kendriya Vidyalaya, Delhi Cantonment. He has moved this Court, by means of the present writ petition, with a prayer for issuance of a direction, to the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) to change the name of his mother, as reflected in his Class X Grade Sheet cum Performance Certificate from Sangeeta Raj to Sangita.2. In support of his claim, the petitioner submits, in this writ petition, that the name of his mother, in all statutory documents, such W.P.(C) 6147/2018 Page...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay vs.state & Anr.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 15, 2019 CRL.M.C. 168/2019 & CRL.M.A. 735/2019 SANJAY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vivek Kumar Pandit, Advocate versus STATE & ANR. Through: Mr. M.S. Oberoi, learned .....Respondents Additional Public Prosecutor with SI Ram Naresh Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.20/2017, under Section 308 of IPC, registered at police station Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding of 5th November, 2018 (Annexure P-2 colly.) and on the ground that misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR in question now stands cleared between the parties. for respondent-State submits that Upon notice, Mr. M.P.Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and she has been identified to be so by SI Ram Naresh on the basis of identity proof produced by her...
Tag this Judgment!Coastal Marine Construction and Engineering Limited & Anr vs.indian Oi ...
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:15. 01.2019 + W.P.(C) 5525/2018 COASTAL MARINE CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING LIMITED & ANR versus ........ Petitioners INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ RESPONDENTS For the... Petitioners For the... RESPONDENTS : : Mr C.S. Vaidyanathan, Senior Advocate along with Mr Aditya Verma, Mr Bimal Rajesekhar and Mr Shrey Patnaik, Advocates. Mr Raman Kapur, Senior Advocate with Mr Amit Meharia, Ms Tannishtha Singh and Ms Rupali Bansal, Advocates for R-1/IOCL. Ms Shubhra Parashar and Mr Virender Pratap Singh Charak, Advocates for R-2/UOI. CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioners have filed the present petition impugning an order dated 30.03.2018 passed by the Director (Pipelines) of respondent No.1 (hereafter IOCL), whereby the petitioner no.1s appeal against the order dated 15.11.2017 (hereafter the impugned orders) passed by the General Manager of IOC...
Tag this Judgment!