Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (2.09 seconds)
Documents citing Karma vs Union Of India 26 Wpc/844/2018 Ram Kumar ... on 4 April, 2018

Nakul Singh vs Kailash Yadav on 2 September, 2024

33. A certified copy of this judgment be sent to the Ld Trial Court forthwith. Trial Court record be sent back. Digitally signed by RICHA RICHA GUSAIN GUSAIN SOLANKI Date: 2024.09.02 SOLANKI 17:29:08 +0530 Pronounced in the open court (RICHA GUSAIN SOLANKI) on 02nd September 2024 District Judge-02, South West Dwarka Courts Complex New Delhi MCA DJ ADJ 41/2023 Nakul Singh vs. Kailash Yadav page 6/6
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs Sh. Ram Kumar Tokas on 30 March, 2021

The Ld. District & Sessions Judge while dealing with the Appeal, summarized that the order dated 12.02.2013, whereby sanction for the building plan was rejected, was passed mainly on two points i.e. first, pendency of Civil Suit No. 1269/2006 titled "Ram Kumar Vs. Prem Singh" respecting certain portion on a corner of the plot in question abutting the main public street and second, the fact that the portion where the building is proposed to be constructed does not abut on public street. Ld. District & Sessions Judge noted the discrepancies between the two as referred to in the order of the Ld. ATMCD and inter alia observed that as per site plan at Page No. 28, the plot in possession of the respondent (to which he is claiming exclusive title) extends right up to main street. However, the drawing at Page No. 77, the portion claimed to be his property by the respondent is restricted to one shown as ABCD with line "CD" located parallel and away from the main street separated by at least 24.3 feet, which is the dimension of the one side of the disputed plot. Ld. District & Sessions Judge also observed that the main entrance leads not only into the plot but also to the properties of certain others.
Delhi District Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Veer Enterprises vs The Union Of India And Others on 9 February, 2024

CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI For the Petitioner : Mr. Pranit Bag, Advocate (through V.C.) Mr. Ankit Sinha, Advocate Mr. Rishu Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Anil Kumar, ASGI Mr. Amit Kumar, Sr. SC (CGST) Through Hybrid Mode Order No.06/Dated: 09th February 2024 Mr. Pranit Bag, the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the orders passed by Gujarat High Court in "Pooran Singh v. Union of India" (2023) 151 taxmann.com 84, "Kansarabazar.in v. State of Gujarat" (2023) 153 taxmann.com 728 and "Patel Suprimkumar Jitendrabhai v. State of Gujarat" (2023) 154 taxmann.com 27 to submit that once the Assessing Officer exercised powers under section 129 of the Goods and Services Tax (in short, GST) he shall not have powers to switch over to section 130 of the said Act so as to confiscate the goods and impose penalty thereon.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1