Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on :30.01.2014 Judgment delivered on 06.02.2014. CRL.A. 64/2006 SARLA Through ..... Appellant Mr. Sumit Verma, Adv. versus STATE Through ..... Respondent Mr. Navin K. Jha, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.The appellant before this Court is Sarla. She has been convicted under Sections 363, 366-A and Section 376 read with Section 120-B of the IPC. She had been charged under Section 376 (g) of the IPC but had been acquitted of the said charge. For the offence under Section 366 of the IPC, she had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for 15 days. For the offence under Section 366-A of the IPC, she had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 2- years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for 15 days. For the offence under Section 376 read with Section 120-B ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
% + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:29. 05.2017 ARB.P. 21/2017 AFCONS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. ........ Petitioner Versus ..... Respondent RAIL VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Mr P. Chidambaram and Mr Gopal Jain, Senior Advocates with Mr Manu Sheshadri, Ms Sahiba Ahluwalia, Mr Ishan Bisht and Mr Tanmay Nandi Mr N.K. Kaul, ASG with Mr Anil Seth, Mr Udit Seth, Mr Samar and Ms Hansa Kaul. For the Respondent: CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU VIBHU BAKHRU, J JUDGMENT1 The petitioner (hereinafter referred to as Afcons) has filed the present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter the Act) inter alia praying that an arbitrator be appointed - on behalf of the respondent, Rail Vikas Nigam Limited (RVNL) - for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the agreement dated 12.12.2011.2. The controversy involved in the present case essenti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ST. APPL. No.63/2014 $~ * 15 + H.G. INTERNATIONAL ...Petitioner Through: Mr. H.L. Taneja with Mr Sumit Kumar Batra, Advocate versus THE COMMISSIONER OF TRADE AND TAXES, DELHI... RESPONDENTThrough: Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr. R.A Iyer, Advocate for with Ms. Trisha Singh, LA % CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH ORDER1608.2017 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. The matter is taken up for hearing today as 14th August 2017 was declared a holiday on account of Janmashtami.2. The only question of law framed by the order dated 4th August 2016 is whether the VATO (Audit) can pass an assessment order in terms of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004?. 3. The present appeal by the Assessee under Section 81 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (DVAT Act) is directed against an order dated 1st August 2014 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Value Added Tax (AT) dismissing the Appellants appeal against two separate orders, dated 9th September 2011...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.966/2018 % ABHISHEK SHARMA & ANR. 30th November, 2018 ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Vijay Sharma and Mr. Anuj Pal, Advocates (Mobile No.9811368656). versus JYOTI MAKHIJA ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) C.M. Appl. No.49860/2018 (for exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of. RFA No.966/2018 and C.M. Appl. No.49859/2018 (for stay) 2. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendants in the suit RFA No.966/2018 Page 1 of 22 impugning the Judgment of the trial court dated 21.08.2018 by which the trial court has decreed the suit for possession, recovery of arrears of rent and permanent injunction filed by the respondent/plaintiff against the appellants/defendants. As per the plaint, the appellant No.1/defendant No.1 was a tenant of the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.786/2017 % VIKAS WADHWA19h December, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajesh Banati and Mr. Advocates Banati, Ankit (Mobile No.9810294894). PARDEEP KUMAR & ORS versus Through: Mr. Brahmanand ........ RESPONDENTS Gupta, Advocate for R-4 to 7 (Mobile No.9899194195). Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate for R-8 (Mobile No.9891454997). CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the plaintiff in the suit impugning the Judgment of the trial court dated 04.05.2017 by which the trial court has dismissed the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff for recovery of possession of the suit property bearing No.D-213, JJ Colony, Shakur Pur, Delhi (hereinafter suit property). RFA No.786/2017 Page 1 of 22 2(i). The facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff pleaded that he had purchased the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:25. h February, 2019 + CS (OS) 3891/2014 & I.A. 5501/2015 GURCHARAN SINGH SAHNEY & ORS. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Mr. Amit Choudhary Rakshay, Mr. Virmani Sukhmeet Singh Lamba, Advocates. (M:9582028538) versus HARPREET SINGH CHHABRA & ANR. .... Defendants Through: Mr. H. S. Kohli, Advocate. (M:9810119661) CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) I.A. 15997/2015 (u/S8of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996) 1. The Plaintiffs have filed the present suit for cancellation, declaration, recovery, permanent injunction and mandatory injunction, seeking the following reliefs: (a) pass and pronounce a decree to cancel the settlement deed dated 30.04.2012, letter of guarantee dated 30.04.2012, ratification deed dated 03.05.2012 and the special power of attorney dated 28.05.2012 against the Defendants and in favour of the Plaintiffs; (b) pass and pronounce a decree to declare null and void ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:15. h July, 2019 Pronounced on:17. h July, 2019 % + W.P. (C) 7137/2019 & CM APPL.29702/2019 NANDITA NARAIN ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Siddharth Seem, Adv. versus ST. STEPHEN'S COLLEGE THROUGH: ITS PRINCIPAL & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. A. Mariarputham, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Romy Chacko, Mr. Rajesh Roshan and Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Advs. for R-1 to 3 Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. with Mr. Hardik Rupal, Mr. Prang Newmai and Mr. Kousik Ghosh, Advs. for University of Delhi CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT C.HARI SHANKAR, J.1. The petitioner is Associate Professor of Mathematics in the Respondent No.1- College (hereinafter referred to as the College). Purportedly championing the cause of those who sought to obtain admission to the portals of the College, but failed to do so, the petitioner essentially asserts, in this writ petition, that, again...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON:26. 02.2015 PRONOUNCED ON:20. 03.2015 % + ITA252001 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX versus M/S. ABHINANDAN INVESTMENT LTD. ITA8402008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI II versus MEDICARE INVESTMENTS LTD. ..... Appellant ..... Respondent ..... Appellant ..... Respondent ITA262001 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant versus JINDAL EQUIPMENTS LEASING & CONS. SERV. .... Respondent Through : Sh. Rohit Madan, Sh. P. Roychaudhuri and Sh. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocates, for the Revenue. Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha, Adv. for assessees. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. These three appeals involve common questions of law directed against a common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 05.06.2000. Initially, a Division Bench had decided the case on, 08.10.2001, reported in (2002) 254 ITR0538(Commissioner of Income Tax v. ITA Nos.25/01...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON:26. 02.2015 PRONOUNCED ON:20. 03.2015 % + ITA252001 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX versus M/S. ABHINANDAN INVESTMENT LTD. ITA8402008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI II versus MEDICARE INVESTMENTS LTD. ..... Appellant ..... Respondent ..... Appellant ..... Respondent ITA262001 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant versus JINDAL EQUIPMENTS LEASING & CONS. SERV. .... Respondent Through : Sh. Rohit Madan, Sh. P. Roychaudhuri and Sh. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocates, for the Revenue. Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha, Adv. for assessees. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. These three appeals involve common questions of law directed against a common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 05.06.2000. Initially, a Division Bench had decided the case on, 08.10.2001, reported in (2002) 254 ITR0538(Commissioner of Income Tax v. ITA Nos.25/01...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON:26. 02.2015 PRONOUNCED ON:20. 03.2015 % + ITA252001 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX versus M/S. ABHINANDAN INVESTMENT LTD. ITA8402008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI II versus MEDICARE INVESTMENTS LTD. ..... Appellant ..... Respondent ..... Appellant ..... Respondent ITA262001 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant versus JINDAL EQUIPMENTS LEASING & CONS. SERV. .... Respondent Through : Sh. Rohit Madan, Sh. P. Roychaudhuri and Sh. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocates, for the Revenue. Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha, Adv. for assessees. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. These three appeals involve common questions of law directed against a common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 05.06.2000. Initially, a Division Bench had decided the case on, 08.10.2001, reported in (2002) 254 ITR0538(Commissioner of Income Tax v. ITA Nos.25/01...
Tag this Judgment!