Delhi Court February 2019 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2019 Page 29 of about 750 results (0.015 seconds)Anjani Gupta vs.alok Gupta & Ors.
Court: Delhi
$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Order:18. 02.2019 Tr. P. (C) No.2/2018 ANJANI GUPTA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Ravi Sikri, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Rohit Agrawal and Mr.Deepank Yadav, Advocates. Versus ALOK GUPTA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Shiv Charan Garg, Advocate with Mr.Imran Khan, Advocate for R1 to R7. Mr.Amardeep Singh, Advocate with Ms.Shruti Khosla, Advocate for R8. Mr.Shekhar Kumar, Advocate for R10 to R16 and R18 to R20. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL Various civil suits are pending between the petitioner and the 1. respondents, four of them in different courts at Shahdara District, two in East District, (Karkardooma Court complex) and three in Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.2. The petitioner seeks transfer of the following six civil suits between the parties from Karkardooma Court complex to Central District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi where three civil suits between the Tr.P. (C) No.2/2018 Page 1 of 4 parties are pendin...
Tag this Judgment!Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha and Anr. Vs.the Election Commission of In ...
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on:13. h February, 2019 Pronounced on:18. t February, 2019 + W.P.(C) 11957/2018 & CM APPL No.46864/2018 AKHIL BHARAT HINDU MAHASABHA AND ANR. ........ Petitioner Through : Mr.Ashok Panigrahi, Mr.Anmol Tayal, and Mr.S.Vijay Ratnakar, Advocates. THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA versus ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA YOGESH KHANNA, J.1. This petition is filed for a direction to the respondent to comply with Section 29(A)(9) of the Representation of Peoples Act in terms of representation dated 17.10.2018 filed by the petitioners and to recognize petitioner no.2 as a duly elected National President of petitioner no.1, a political party and to include the name of National President as an authorised office bearer of the petitioner no.1 and to permit him to use Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha (ABHM) party symbol.2. It is alleged petitioner no.1 was founded in the year 1907 and w...
Tag this Judgment!Iftakar @ Istekar & Ors. Vs.the State & Anr.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 18, 2019 CRL.M.C. 896/2019 & Crl.M.A. 3567/2019 IFTAKAR @ ISTEKAR & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Prateek Dhaka & Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocates Versus THE STATE & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1- State with ASI Yashpal Singh Mr. Asif Rai, Advocate with respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.244/2016, under Sections 498A/406/5of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at police station Karawal Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 10th September, 2018 reached between the parties. respondent No.2, present Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- is the State submits that complainant/first informant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by ASI Yashpal Singh on the basis of identity proof produced by her. in the Co...
Tag this Judgment!Muskan Exim Inc. Vs.commissioner of Customs (Export)
Court: Delhi
$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:18. h February, 2019. + W.P.(C) 1235/2019 & CM Appl. 5593-94/2019 MUSKAN EXIM INC. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. A.K. Seth, Mr. Chinmaya Seth and Mr. Ekansh Mishra, Advs. versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT) ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN PRATEEK JALAN, J.(ORAL) % 1. The petitioner assails an order dated 27.09.2018 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs principally on the ground that the matter was then pending consideration before the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Settlement Commission [hereinafter referred to as the Commission"]..2. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the petitioner was served with a Show Cause Notice dated 14.12.2017 pursuant to an investigation by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI). The DRI had come to the conclusion that the petitioner had inflated the ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Anita Gupta vs.sh. Suresh Dudani & Anr
Court: Delhi
$~OS-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * % + CS(OS) 392/2017 SMT. ANITA GUPTA Date of decision:18. 02.2019 ..... Plaintiff Through Ms.Payal Jain, Adv. versus SH. SURESH DUDANI & ANR ..... Defendants Through Ms.Rakhi Dubey, Adv. for D-1. Mr.A.V.Bagur, Adv. for D-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) IA No.1347/2019 1. This application is filed under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC seeking a decree in favour of the plaintiff.2. Learned counsel for defendant No.2 has filed his reply in court which is taken on record.3. Present suit is filed by the plaintiff seeking a decree of permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from parting with possession in respect of the property No.11/394, Sunder Vihar, New Delhi-110087. A decree of possession is also sought regarding the suit property. CS(OS) 392/2017 Page 1 of 14 4. The case of the plaintiff is that she is the registered owner of the property No.11/394, Sunder Vihar, New Delhi and is presently a resident of USA. I...
Tag this Judgment!P vs.m K B
Court: Delhi
$~16 & 17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgement:18. h February, 2019 + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 298/2018 P Through: Mr. Sachin Chopra, Mr. S.S. Bhatia, ..... Appellant Mr. Karan Babuta & Ms. Astha Gupta, Advocates. Versus + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 299/2018 M K B P Through: Ms. Vijaya Lakshmi Jain, Advocate. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sachin Chopra, Mr. S.S. Bhatia, ..... Appellant Mr. Karan Babuta & Ms. Astha Gupta, Advocates. Versus Through: Ms. Vijaya Lakshmi Jain, Advocate. ..... Respondent M K B CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. Both the appeals are set down for final hearing and disposal. The aforesaid two appeals filed by the appellant arise out of a common order dated 10.09.2018 passed by the Family Court with respect to two applications filed by the appellant/wife; one under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as HMA) seeking MAT.APP.s (F.C.) 298 & 299/2018 Page 1 of 11 interim mai...
Tag this Judgment!All India Radio vs.m/s Electonic Enterprises & Ors
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:18. h February, 2019. ..... Appellant FAO(OS) 36/2019 ALL INDIA RADIO M/S ELECTONIC ENTERPRISES & ORS + CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO versus Through: Through: Ms. Madhusmita Bora, Adv. ........ RESPONDENTS V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.(ORAL) CM. No.7677/2019 (for exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. FAO(OS) 36/2019 1. The challenge in this appeal is to the order dated January 7, 2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in IA382019 which is an application for modification of orders dated October 22, 2018 and November 14, 2018, which read as under: Order dated October 22, 2018 5. Learned counsel for the Respondent/UOI submits that the All India Radio is a relevant party and ought to be impleaded in the present case, and that the Respondent is moving an application to the said effect.6. Since the equipment allegedly supplied by the... Petitioner ...
Tag this Judgment!Swift Securitas (P) Ltd vs.gulshan Sharma
Court: Delhi
$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:-"18.02.2019 + W.P.(C) 6826/2017 & CM APPL. 28422/2017 SWIFT SECURITAS (P) LTD ........ Petitioner Through Mr.Arun Mehta with Mr.Prabha Mishra, Advs. versus GULSHAN SHARMA ..... Respondent Through Mr.R.S.Jena with Mr.Sonu Kumar, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL) 1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner impugns the order dated 04.07.2017 passed by the learned Labour Court in O.P. No.06/2017, whereunder the learned Labour Court has while framing the issues after completion of the pleadings in the petitioners application u/s 33(1)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as Act), refused to frame any issue regarding the validity and legality of the domestic inquiry stated to have been conducted by the petitioner. The learned Labour Court has straightaway framed issues regarding the alleged misconduct of the respondent and as to whether the petitioner was entitled to...
Tag this Judgment!Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-9 vs.m/s Vodafone Essar Gujarat L ...
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:18. 02.2019 ITA7852017 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9..... Appellant Through : Sh. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR GUJARAT LIMITED ..... Respondent Through : Sh. Sachit Jolly and Sh. Siddharth Joshi, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % Admit.1. The Revenue claims to be aggrieved by the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter the Act]. and contends that it is not in consonance with the order of this Court in CIT v. Shri Ram Honda Power Equipments 2007 (289) ITR475(Del).2. The facts necessary for this order is that the respondent/assessee, a telecommunications company had claimed benefit of Section 80-IA of the Act. Apparently, it also reported a loan transaction to its group company M/s. Hutchison Essar South Ltd. The facts relat...
Tag this Judgment!Yusuf & Ors. Vs.state of Nct of Delhi & Anr.
Court: Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 18, 2019 CRL.M.C. 893/2019 & Crl.M.A. 3561/2019 YUSUF & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Umesh Gupta & Ms. Jasvinder Singh, Advocates Versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. M.P.Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1- State with SI Kusum Lata Mr. M. Shamikh, Advocate with respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.216/2016, under Sections 498A/4of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at police station Jafrabad, Delhi is sought on the basis of mediated Settlement Deed of 13th November, 2018 (Annexure P-4) reached between the parties. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State submits that is the complainant/first informant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by SI Kusum Lata on the basis of identity proof produced by respondent No.2, present i...
Tag this Judgment!