Skip to content

Delhi High Court Judgements

81130 Judgements Hosted as on 24/08/2023 SEARCH (FREE) READ DOWNLOAD

Delhi High Court Judgements

81130 Judgements Hosted as on 24/08/2023 SEARCH (FREE) READ DOWNLOAD

  • Home
  • Pricing
  • Account
  • About
  • Contact
    • Home
    • admin_lawsdelhi
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Evidence By Way Of Affidavit Not Mandatory When Documentary Evidence Sufficient For Determining Well-Known Status Of Trademark

admin_lawsdelhi Jul 7, 2023 0 Comments

C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 66/2021 Page 1 of 19 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 4 th July, 2023 Date of decision: 6 th July, 2023…

DIRECT TAXATION MUNICIPAL LAWS

DB – services rendered by advocates are professional activities, and, therefore, they cannot be levied with taxes under the “commercial establishment” category

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 29, 2023 0 Comments

“The rule of strict interpretation of taxation statute has to be applied. There is no scope of reading any derivative meaning or of reading any intent of the statute. Insofar…

ACCIDENT COMPENSATION RAILWAYS

Inquest proceedings were conducted around 8:55 am on 05.01.2017, which mentions the recovery of a journey ticket dated 04.01.2017 — Mere delay in noticing and reporting the incident by a third party ought to have been appreciated in light of the fact that the incident statedly took place in the month of January – Matter remanded to tribunal for grant of compensation

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 27, 2023 0 Comments

DELHI HIGH COURT Before: Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. FAO 442 of 2018 & CM APPL.38848 of 2018Reserved on: 23.02.2023 Decided on: 24.05.2023 Om Parkash & Anr. - Appellants Versus Union…

C P C EVIDENCE ACT

DB – Defamation — Nowhere in the pleadings or in the evidence did the appellant or its witnesses state that the amounts were not due — Respondent’s assertion of there being outstanding amounts which had not been paid by the appellant Company cannot be termed to be false or per se defamatory.

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 27, 2023 0 Comments

DELHI HIGH COURT Before: Suresh Kumar Kait & Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ. RFA(OS) 3 of 2019 & CM APPL. 1031 of 2019 Reserved on: 10.04.2023 Decided on: 30.05.2023 India Skills…

C P C

“The process of the Court cannot be utilized for the purposes of gathering information as to the whereabouts or the other information in respect of the respondent/judgment debtor. It is the primary obligation of the petitioner/decree holder itself to obtain such information from wherever it is possible.

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 26, 2023 0 Comments

“The process of the Court cannot be utilized for the purposes of gathering information as to the whereabouts or the other information in respect of the respondent/judgment debtor. It is…

DIRECT TAXATION INCOME TAX ACT

Delhi High Court Directs AO To Provide Information To Vodafone Mauritius To Drive Out The Validity Of TRC

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 26, 2023 0 Comments

AO has attributed an intent to the assessee, which is that it would indulge in tax evasion, inter alia, by treaty shopping, without any material or   information of such kind…

DIRECT TAXATION INCOME TAX ACT

DB – Assessment Order Cannot Be Directed Against Only One Of The Legal Heirs Of Deceased Assessee

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 26, 2023 0 Comments

Delhi HC has set aside an assessment order of Rs. 10 crores passed by the Income Tax Department, solely on the ground that it was passed against only one of…

C P C

Trade Marks Act, 1999 (47 of 1999), Section(s) 28(3), 30(2)(e), 134 – Refusal of application for rejection of plaint – Maintainability of appeal — No provision for filing an appeal from an order of refusal of an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC passed by a Court

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 25, 2023 0 Comments

DELHI HIGH COURT Before: Manmohan & Saurabh Banerjee, JJ. FAO(OS) (COMM) 3 of 2023 CM APPL.1397-1398 of 2023 Decided on: 12.01.2023 Bhushan Oil and Fats Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant Versus…

CHEQUE BOUNCE

Vicarious liability of Chief Account officer – Officer,  non-signatory to cheque —  Specific averment that petitioner/ accused persuaded the complainant to enter into the transaction with the Company by showing the financial position of the Company as well as making them believe in the capacity of the same to repay the debts – Held, complainant has fulfilled the basic criteria

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 25, 2023 0 Comments

DELHI HIGH COURT Before: Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. CRL.M.C. 5218 of 2019 Reserved on: 12.01.2023 Decided on: 17.01.2023 Anurag Gangwal - Petitioner Versus State & Anr. - Respondents Alongwith CRL.M.A.…

CHEQUE BOUNCE

Vicarious liability — Phraseology used in Section 141 of the Act of being in charge and responsible to the Company for the conduct of the business of Company is a reference to an “executive activity” which imports an element of running day-to-day affairs of the Company and would not be extended to a role which is essentially supervisory, policy oriented, of oversight or regulatory i.e. non-executive in character

admin_lawsdelhi Jun 25, 2023 0 Comments

DELHI HIGH COURT Before: Anish Dayal, J. CRL.M.C. 1409 of 2018 Reserved on: 13.03.2023 Decided on: 11.04.2023 Yashovardhan Birla - Petitioner Versus CECIL Webber Engineering Ltd & Ors - Respondents…

Posts navigation

1 2 … 12

Next Page »

Login Status

Forgot?  Register

Categories

You Missed

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Evidence By Way Of Affidavit Not Mandatory When Documentary Evidence Sufficient For Determining Well-Known Status Of Trademark

DIRECT TAXATION MUNICIPAL LAWS

DB – services rendered by advocates are professional activities, and, therefore, they cannot be levied with taxes under the “commercial establishment” category

ACCIDENT COMPENSATION RAILWAYS

Inquest proceedings were conducted around 8:55 am on 05.01.2017, which mentions the recovery of a journey ticket dated 04.01.2017 — Mere delay in noticing and reporting the incident by a third party ought to have been appreciated in light of the fact that the incident statedly took place in the month of January – Matter remanded to tribunal for grant of compensation

C P C EVIDENCE ACT

DB – Defamation — Nowhere in the pleadings or in the evidence did the appellant or its witnesses state that the amounts were not due — Respondent’s assertion of there being outstanding amounts which had not been paid by the appellant Company cannot be termed to be false or per se defamatory.

Delhi High Court Judgements

81130 Judgements Hosted as on 24/08/2023 SEARCH (FREE) READ DOWNLOAD

Copyright © All rights reserved