Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA26302005 NORTH DELHI POWER LTD. Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Senior Advocate with Mr. B.B. Jain, Mr. Anupam Varma, Mr. Nikhil Sharma, Mr. Jibran Tak, Mr. Rahul and Mr. Sameer Abhyanker, Advocates versus M.C.D. Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Madhu Tewatia with Ms. Sidhi Arora and Ms. Adirath Singh, Advocates for MCD. Ms. Zubeda Begum, Advocate for GNCT of Delhi Reserved on :11. h October, 2013 Date of Decision:09. h December, 2013 % CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J:1. Present letters patent appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 25th July, 2005 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 3913/2004 titled as Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. North Delhi Power Limited.2. The primary issue that arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the 8080 sq. mtrs. of vacant plot of land near sub-station Civil Lines Zone occupied by the appellant is ow...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:07. 05.2014 W.P.(C) 663/2014 MADHYA PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD ..... Petitioner versus PUNJAB & SIND BANK & ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Sakesh Kumar. For the Respondent: Mr Rajender Wahi, Advocate for R-1. Ms Suparna Srivastava, Advocate for R-3 & 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J (ORAL) 1. By the present petition, Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board (MPSEB) impugns an order dated 15.10.2013 passed by Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT). In terms of Madhya Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2000, State of Chattisgarh claims to be a necessary/interested party in the matter and submits that it has moved an application for impleadment before DRAT, which is pending. In these circumstances, the learned counsels appearing for State of Madhya Pradesh, State of Chhattisgarh and also the counsel for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.300/2011 Reserved on:10. h July, 2014 Date of decision:18. h July, 2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Jr. Standing Counsel. versus HEARTLAND DELHI TRANSCRIPTION SERVICES PVT LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. P. Kapoor, Advocate with Mr. Anuj Dhir and Ms. Bina Gupta, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.: This appeal by the Revenue pertains to assessment year 2004-05 and relates to interpretation of Section 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short).2. By order dated 11th May, 2011, the following substantial questions of law were framed:(i) Whether ITAT was correct in law in allowing deduction u/s 10B of the Act to the assessee?. (ii) Whether ITAT has correctly interpreted the provisions of Section 10B of the Act?. 2. The respondent is an assessee, who claims deduc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on: July 30, 2014 I.A. No.1438/2014, I.A. No.2867/2014, I.A. No.5754/2014, I.A. No.6157/2014 and I.A. No.11895/2014 in CS(OS) 217/2014 YES BANK LIMITED Through ..... Plaintiff Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Shiv Sapra, Adv. versus A2Z MAINTENANCE & ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD & ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr.A.S. Chandhiok, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Atul Kumar, Mr.Arun Gaur, Ms.Mallika Ahluwalia, Mr.Ritesh Kumar and Mr.Mayank Bamniyal, Advs. for D-1 & 2. Mr.Robin David, Adv. with Mr.Chitranshal Sinha, Adv. for D-3. Mr.Abhinav Thareja with Mr.S.N. Relan, Adv. for applicant in I.A. No.6157/2014. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and a Bank company under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 who has filed the present suit for declaration, permanent and mandatory injunction against four defendants seeking various reliefs mentioned in the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL No.35/2002 Reserved on:8. h September, 2014 Date of decision:23. d December, 2014 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-IV.. Appellant Through Mr. Rohit Madan, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus M/S D.C.M. LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. V.P. Gupta & Mr. Anunav Kumar, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.: This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) stands admitted for adjudication on the following substantial question of law:Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no transfer within the meaning of S.32A(5) of the Act under the Scheme of Arrangement of the assessee company and, therefore, the Assessing Officer erred in withdrawing the investment allowance granted earlier under Section 155 (4A) of the Act?. 2. The respondent-assessee is a company and during the per...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL No.35/2002 Reserved on:8. h September, 2014 Date of decision:23. d December, 2014 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-IV.. Appellant Through Mr. Rohit Madan, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus M/S D.C.M. LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. V.P. Gupta & Mr. Anunav Kumar, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO SANJIV KHANNA, J.: This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short) stands admitted for adjudication on the following substantial question of law:Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no transfer within the meaning of S.32A(5) of the Act under the Scheme of Arrangement of the assessee company and, therefore, the Assessing Officer erred in withdrawing the investment allowance granted earlier under Section 155 (4A) of the Act?. 2. The respondent-assessee is a company and during the per...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: February 02 2015 Judgment Delivered on: February 23, 2015 + LPA No.6/2015 HINDUSTAN TIMES LIMITED ..... Appellant Represented by: Dr.Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Senior Advocate and Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Darpan Wadhwa, Ms.Meghna Mishra, Mr.Nakul Sachdeva, Ms.Ritika Ahuja and Ms.Roshni Namboodiry, Advocates. Versus AITA RAM Represented by: .....Respondent Mr.Colin Gonsalves, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr.Sarvajeet Kumar Thakur, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRATIBHA RANI, J.1. Alleging that the services were illegally terminated on October 03, 2004, the workman of the appellant raised an industrial dispute which resulted in an award dated January 23, 2012 being passed directing reinstatement of the workman with further direction that such workman who had received the compensation under Section 25(FF) of the ID Act, 1947 would refund the s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA2022011 & CM Nos.5542/2012 & 12135/2012 (both for filing addl. docs.) Pronounced on:24. 02.2015 % JAYASWAL NECO INDUSTRIES LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. G.C. Bharuka, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Devashish Bharuka, Ms. Jasmeet Kaur & Mr. Kaushik, Advs. Versus SARDA ENERGY AND MINERALS LTD & ORS..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ratan Kr. Singh with Mr. J.K. Chaudhary, Mr. Vinod Chawla, Mr. Shashi Bhushan & Mr. Akshay Malhotra, Advs. for R-1. Ms. Maneesha Dhir, Adv. for R-2. Mr. Abhay Prakash Sahay, CGSC with Mr. A.K. Sinha & Ms. Indu Prabha, Advs. Mr. Atul Jha & Mr. Sandeep Jha, Advs. for State of Chhattisgarh. AND + LPA2052011 JAYASWAL NECO INDUSTRIES LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. G.C. Bharuka, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Devashish Bharuka, Ms. Jasmeet Kaur & Mr. Kaushik, Advs. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Abhay Prakash Sahay, CGSC with Mr. A.K. Sinha & Ms. Indu Prabha, Advs. for UOI. Mr. Ratan Kr. Singh with Mr. J.K. Chaudhary,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
1. The challenge in both these petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ( ˜Act') is to an Award dated 1st November 2014 passed by the learned sole Arbitrator in the disputes between the parties. Background facts 2. The parties are all descendants of late Rai Bahadur Janki Dass Kapur. His three sons were Mr. Bishambar Dass Kapur, Mr. Jaidev Kapur and Mr. Jagdish Kapur. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, one of the sons of late Mr. Jagdish Kapur, Mr. Gautam Kapur and Mr. Girish Kapur, sons of late Mr. Jaidev Kapur and Mr. Rishav Kapur, son of Mr. Girish Kapur are the Petitioners in OMP No. 30 of 2015. Another son of Mr. Jagdish Kapur, namely, Mr. Salil Kapur is not himself a Petitioner. However, his two sons, Mr. Prashant Kapur and Mr. Ashwin Kapur, have filed OMP No. 31 of 2015. 3. The contesting Respondents in both petitions belong to the family branch of late Mr. B.D Kapur. The first two respondents, Mr. Vikram Kapur and Mr. Rajiv Kapur are the sons of late Mr. B....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
G. Rohini, CJ. 1. LPA Nos.202/2011 and 205/2011 were dismissed by this court by common judgment dated 24.02.2015. The said judgment is sought to be reviewed in these Review Petitions. 2. The State of Chhattisgarh/respondent No.3 in LPA No.202/2011 preferred Review Petition No.361/2015 whereas M/s Jayaswal Neco Industries Ltd./appellant in LPA Nos.202/2011 and 205/2011 preferred Review Petition Nos.373/2015 and 374/2015 in LPA Nos.202/2011 and 205/2011 respectively. 3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties. 4. The dispute between M/s Jayaswal Neco Industries Ltd. and M/s Sarda Energy and Minerals Ltd. regarding grant of Prospecting Licence (PL) under the provisions of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 for the purpose of exploring iron ore deposits in Boria Tibbu area of Rajnandgaon District situated in the State of Madhya Pradesh, which has become part of State of Chhattisgarh w.e.f. 01.11.2000 by virtue of Madhya Pradesh Reorganization...
Tag this Judgment!