Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-01-2014
$~R-101 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA5692005 Reserved on 21st November, 2014 Delivered on 1st December, 2014 INDIAN AIRLINES Through ..... Appellant : Mr. Amit K. Pateria, Adv. Versus ANGELIQUE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED & ANR..... Through : None ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.1. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant has canvassed that wrong delivery of goods will fall within the ambit and scope of Clause 18 of the Carriage by Air Act, 1972 (the Act, for short), thus, suit for recovery of `6,46,800/- filed by the respondent No.1 against appellant was barred by time, having been filed after two years of loss of goods, in view of Rule 29 of the first Schedule and Rule 30 of the second Schedule to the Act.2. By placing reliance on M/s. Vij Sales Corporation vs. Lufthansa Airlines, 1981 2 ILR (Del) 749, which was later on followed in Old Village Ind. Vs. British Airways 1991 RLR443 trial court, in the context of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-04-2014
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:4. h December, 2014 + W.P.(C) No.2182/2011 PASUPATI SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS LTD..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Navin Chawla, Mr. Aditya V. Singh and Mr. Anurag Narula, Advocates. Versus REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER AND ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Aparna Bhat, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr.H.K.Chaturvedi, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition is directed against the original order dated 28.03.2005 passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner and the appellate order dated 28.01.2011, whereby an amount of Rs.56,086/- has been determined on account of provident fund dues for the period from September, 1999 to April, 2003, in respect of respondent No.2.2. Vide the aforesaid original order, the petitioner was directed that the amount shall be paid in respective accounts within a period of 15 days from the da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-04-2014
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:4. h December, 2014 + W.P.(C) No.2182/2011 PASUPATI SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS LTD..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Navin Chawla, Mr. Aditya V. Singh and Mr. Anurag Narula, Advocates. Versus REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER AND ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Aparna Bhat, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr.H.K.Chaturvedi, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition is directed against the original order dated 28.03.2005 passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner and the appellate order dated 28.01.2011, whereby an amount of Rs.56,086/- has been determined on account of provident fund dues for the period from September, 1999 to April, 2003, in respect of respondent No.2.2. Vide the aforesaid original order, the petitioner was directed that the amount shall be paid in respective accounts within a period of 15 days from the da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: December 02, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 05, 2014 % + CRL.A. 1048/2014 RAJU Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.K.Singhal, Adv. with appellant in person. Versus STATE Represented by: .... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP with Insp.Rajesh Kumar, PS Swaroop Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Raju was charged for committing the murder of Smt.Shashi Rai and firing upon Ajay thus causing bullet injuries on his person in furtherance of common intention with one A a juvenile. Vide impugned judgment dated July 16, 2014 the learned Trial Court has convicted Raju for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC, 307/34 IPC and 25 Arms Act and has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine in sum of `50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine in sum of `50,000/- for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: December 02, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 05, 2014 % + CRL.A. 1048/2014 RAJU Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.K.Singhal, Adv. with appellant in person. Versus STATE Represented by: .... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP with Insp.Rajesh Kumar, PS Swaroop Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Raju was charged for committing the murder of Smt.Shashi Rai and firing upon Ajay thus causing bullet injuries on his person in furtherance of common intention with one A a juvenile. Vide impugned judgment dated July 16, 2014 the learned Trial Court has convicted Raju for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC, 307/34 IPC and 25 Arms Act and has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine in sum of `50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine in sum of `50,000/- for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-05-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: December 02, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 05, 2014 % + CRL.A. 1048/2014 RAJU Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.K.Singhal, Adv. with appellant in person. Versus STATE Represented by: .... Respondent Mr.Varun Goswami, APP with Insp.Rajesh Kumar, PS Swaroop Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Raju was charged for committing the murder of Smt.Shashi Rai and firing upon Ajay thus causing bullet injuries on his person in furtherance of common intention with one A a juvenile. Vide impugned judgment dated July 16, 2014 the learned Trial Court has convicted Raju for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC, 307/34 IPC and 25 Arms Act and has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine in sum of `50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine in sum of `50,000/- for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-08-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: October 10, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 08, 2014 % + CRL.A. 1065/2014 STATE Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Varun Goswami, APP for the State with SI Dalip Kumar, Spl.Cell/NDR. versus BASHIR AHMED PONNU & ORS ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Dinesh Sharma, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate for Respondent No.4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. The State is aggrieved by the decision of the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitting the respondents Bashir Ahmed Ponnu, Fayaz Ahmed Lone, Abdul Majeed Baba and Shahid Gafoor for the offences punishable under Section 120B/121/121-A/122/123 IPC & Section 17/18/20/21/23 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (in short the UAP Act), acquitting Bashir Ahmed for offence punishable under Section 489(B)/489 (C) of IPC and Shahid Gafoor for offences punishable under Section 186/353/...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-08-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:08. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 6387/2012 & CM No.17030/2012 MALIK TANNING INDUSTRIES ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents AND + W.P.(C) 4754/2014 & CM94672014 M/S. KAVISH IMPEX PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Ms Shikha Sapra for petitioner in W.P.(C) 4754/2014. Mr Naveen Malhotra for petitioner in W.P.(C) 6387/2012. For the Respondents : Mr Amit Mahajan, CGSC for UOI in W.P.(C) 6387/2012. Mr Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr Amrit Singh for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in W.P.(C) 4754/2014. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioners impugn policy circular No.42 (RE-2010)/2009-14 dated 21.10.2011 issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (hereafter referred to as impugned circular) inasmuch as it curtails the benefit available under Focus Product Scheme in respect of Techn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-08-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:08. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 6387/2012 & CM No.17030/2012 MALIK TANNING INDUSTRIES ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents AND + W.P.(C) 4754/2014 & CM94672014 M/S. KAVISH IMPEX PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Ms Shikha Sapra for petitioner in W.P.(C) 4754/2014. Mr Naveen Malhotra for petitioner in W.P.(C) 6387/2012. For the Respondents : Mr Amit Mahajan, CGSC for UOI in W.P.(C) 6387/2012. Mr Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr Amrit Singh for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in W.P.(C) 4754/2014. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioners impugn policy circular No.42 (RE-2010)/2009-14 dated 21.10.2011 issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (hereafter referred to as impugned circular) inasmuch as it curtails the benefit available under Focus Product Scheme in respect of Techn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-08-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: October 10, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: December 08, 2014 % + CRL.A. 1065/2014 STATE Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Varun Goswami, APP for the State with SI Dalip Kumar, Spl.Cell/NDR. versus BASHIR AHMED PONNU & ORS ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Dinesh Sharma, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate for Respondent No.4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. The State is aggrieved by the decision of the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitting the respondents Bashir Ahmed Ponnu, Fayaz Ahmed Lone, Abdul Majeed Baba and Shahid Gafoor for the offences punishable under Section 120B/121/121-A/122/123 IPC & Section 17/18/20/21/23 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (in short the UAP Act), acquitting Bashir Ahmed for offence punishable under Section 489(B)/489 (C) of IPC and Shahid Gafoor for offences punishable under Section 186/353/...
Tag this Judgment!