Delhi High Court

48,408 judgments

Year:

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ram Bai & Ors.

30 Oct 2019 · Najmi Waziri · 2019:DHC:5589

The Delhi High Court held that an insurer covering third-party risk under a contractors plant and machinery policy is liable for compensation in a motor vehicle accident on a public road, modifying the quantum of compensation as per Supreme Court guidelines.

civil appeal_allowed Significant third-party insurance contractors plant and machinery insurance transit risk site risk

M/S ONE UP TRADE NET WORKS PVT LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF DELHI VALUE ADDED TAX DEPARTMENT OF TRADE & TAXES

30 Oct 2019 · Chief Justice D.N. Patel; C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:5595-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the VAT authority to decide the petitioner's pending refund claim with interest under the Delhi VAT Act within eight weeks after providing an opportunity of hearing.

tax petition_allowed Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 refund claim input tax credit output tax credit

Anil Goyal & Ors. v. State & Anr.

30 Oct 2019 · Brijesh Sethi · 2019:DHC:5603

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A/34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce between the parties.

criminal petition_allowed Section 498A IPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement mutual consent divorce

Bhojraj @ Sumit v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

30 Oct 2019 · Brijesh Sethi · 2019:DHC:5599

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406 and 420 IPC on the ground of an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR Section 406 IPC Section 420 IPC amicable settlement

Naresh Nagpal & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

30 Oct 2019 · D. N. Patel; C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:5593-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed withdrawal of a writ petition challenging a Deputy Commissioner's order under the Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, directing the petitioners to pursue their remedy through the statutory appellate authority.

administrative appeal_allowed writ petition withdrawal appeal Deputy Commissioner order

Inderjeet & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

30 Oct 2019 · Brijesh Sethi · 2019:DHC:5600

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 323, 324, and 34 IPC on the ground of amicable settlement between family members, exercising its inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR compoundable offences Section 323 IPC Section 324 IPC

Khajanchi and Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

30 Oct 2019 · Brijesh Sethi · 2019:DHC:5601

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 323/341/506/34 IPC on the ground of an amicable settlement between family members, exercising its power under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR amicable settlement Section 323 IPC Section 341 IPC

Pankaj & Ors. v. The State & Anr.

30 Oct 2019 · Brijesh Sethi · 2019:DHC:5602

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce between the parties.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC Section 34 IPC

M/S FAQIR CHAND DALIP KUMAR & ORS v. HDFC BANK LIMITED

30 Oct 2019 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2019:DHC:5574

The Delhi High Court granted limited time to the petitioners to vacate secured property under SARFAESI possession proceedings, emphasizing the secured creditor's right to possession despite delay.

civil appeal_allowed SARFAESI Act Section 13(2) Section 13(4) Section 14

Joginder @ Danny v. State

30 Oct 2019 · Brijesh Sethi · 2019:DHC:5604

The Delhi High Court granted a two-week extension of parole on humanitarian grounds for the petitioner to attend his daughter's surgery, subject to conditions ensuring compliance.

criminal petition_allowed parole extension humanitarian grounds medical emergency Article 226 Constitution

Abdul Lateef Nomani v. University of Delhi & Ors.

30 Oct 2019 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2019:DHC:5583
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the University of Delhi cannot deny admission based on non-affiliation of a school board to COBSE and directed admission of a petitioner whose board is established under a Central University Act.

education petition_allowed Significant Admission Jamia Millia Islamia Board of School Education Council of Boards of School Education in India COBSE

Nandan Singh v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation

30 Oct 2019 · G. S. Sistani; Anup Jairam Bhambhani · 2019:DHC:5605-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the denial of Hospital Patient Care Allowance to Electrical Beldars, holding that their duties do not involve continuous and routine contact with infected patients or materials as required for entitlement.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Hospital Patient Care Allowance HPCA eligibility continuous and routine contact communicable diseases

Veena Gupta v. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd

30 Oct 2019 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2019:DHC:5582

The Delhi High Court held that the appearance of a prepared junior counsel suffices for court proceedings and set aside costs wrongly imposed for non-appearance when such counsel was present.

civil petition_allowed Significant junior counsel appearance proxy counsel imposition of costs court proceedings

Manjeet Singh Chugh v. State & Ors.

30 Oct 2019 · Suresh Kumar Kait · 2019:DHC:5579

The Delhi High Court set aside the order directing inquiry into a co-accused already convicted for a separate offence and directed the trial court to hear the parties afresh on framing of charges.

criminal appeal_allowed false implication distinct offences conviction inquiry

Kaverdeep Singh Khera v. State & Anr.

30 Oct 2019 · Suresh Kumar Kait · 2019:DHC:5580

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under the Arms Act for possession of a single cartridge without a firearm, holding that unconscious possession without threat does not warrant prosecution.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Arms Act, 1959 single cartridge possession Section 25 Arms Act Section 54 Arms Act

Karni Communications Private Limited v. Haicheng Vivo Mobile (India) Private Limited

30 Oct 2019 · Jyoti Singh · 2019:DHC:5581

The Delhi High Court directed the parties' nominated arbitrators to appoint the presiding arbitrator under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, allowing the petition for constitution of the arbitral tribunal.

arbitration petition_allowed Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 12 appointment of arbitrator

Manjit Singh & Anr. v. Virendra Singh

30 Oct 2019 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2019:DHC:5584

The Delhi High Court upheld eviction of tenants for non-payment of rent arrears, emphasizing strict compliance with rent control laws and rejecting condonation of prolonged delay.

property petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 eviction non-payment of rent arrears

Amir Ain v. Qaadira

30 Oct 2019 · R. K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:5586

The Delhi High Court disposed of a possession appeal by recording and enforcing a voluntary settlement between parties under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC, modifying the decree accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed possession decree Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC civil suit settlement

Raman Sharma & Anr. v. Director, Directorate of Enforcement & Anr.

30 Oct 2019 · Suresh Kumar Kait · 2019:DHC:5585

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a private complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act for lack of FIR registration, maintainability, and jurisdiction.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Enforcement Directorate Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. FIR registration

Su-Kam Power Systems Ltd. v. Kunwer Sachdev & Anr.

30 Oct 2019 · Manmohan J · 2019:DHC:5572

The Delhi High Court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, holding that defendant no.1 had no real prospect of defending trademark ownership claims and was estopped from denying plaintiff's rights over the Su-Kam mark.

civil appeal_allowed Significant summary judgment Order XIIIA CPC trade mark ownership estoppel