Delhi High Court

48,408 judgments

Year:

Rakesh Passi & Anr. v. Hawa Singh & Ors.

28 Aug 2019 · Najmi Waziri · 2019:DHC:4202

The Delhi High Court reduced contributory negligence from 50% to 35% in a motor accident claim involving sudden stoppage of a truck, ordered recalculation of compensation with correct multiplier and loss of future prospects, and disposed of the appeal accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation multiplier loss of dependency

Dolly & Ors. v. National Insurance Co Ltd & Ors.

28 Aug 2019 · Najmi Waziri · 2019:DHC:4200

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal to enhance motor accident compensation by applying minimum wages for a matriculate, adding 40% for future prospects, and awarding amounts for loss of consortium and love and affection.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation calculation minimum wages matriculate

Facebook Inc v. Surinder Malik

28 Aug 2019 · Prathiba M. Singh

The Delhi High Court held that Facebook and Instagram, as intermediaries under Section 79 IT Act, are not required to appear personally in trademark infringement suits if they comply with takedown obligations upon notification.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Intermediary liability Section 79 IT Act Trademark infringement Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011

Vinay Kumar Jain v. Serious Fraud Investigation Office

28 Aug 2019 · Jasmeet Singh · 2022:DHC:2673
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court granted bail to a statutory auditor accused under Section 447 of the Companies Act, balancing statutory bail restrictions with constitutional rights and parity with co-accused.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Companies Act 2013 Section 447 Section 212(6)

Ghanshyam Das Gupta v. Union of India, SFIO

28 Aug 2019 · Jasmeet Singh · 2022:DHC:2674
Cites 1 · Cited by 4

Delhi High Court granted regular bail to a statutory auditor accused under Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013, emphasizing compliance with auditing standards, absence of specific fraud allegations, and parity with co-accused granted bail.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Companies Act 2013 Section 447 Section 212(6)

Ashok Kumar Makhija v. Serious Fraud Investigation Office

28 Aug 2019 · Jasmeet Singh · 2022:DHC:2543
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted bail to retired bank officers accused of economic offences under the Companies Act, balancing statutory bail restrictions with constitutional rights and prior bail grants to co-accused.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail economic offences Companies Act 2013 Section 212(6)

Sandeep Sirohi v. GNCTD

28 Aug 2019 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:366-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner possessed a valid OBC certificate under GNCTD policy and was entitled to OBC reservation benefits, setting aside the Tribunal’s rejection of his candidature.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant OBC reservation Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board Other Backward Classes OBC certificate

Commissioner of Customs v. Himanshu Gupta

27 Aug 2019 · Hima Kohli; Asha Menon · 2019:DHC:7711-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside CESTAT remand orders based on a stayed Supreme Court decision and directed fresh disposal of customs appeals uninfluenced by that decision.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Customs Appeal CESTAT remand jurisdiction

Commissioner of Customs v. Bimal Kumar Jain

27 Aug 2019 · Hima Kohli; Asha Menon · 2019:DHC:7706-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the Commissioner of Customs' appeals, quashing CESTAT remand orders influenced by a stayed Coordinate Bench decision, and directed fresh disposal of appeals uninfluenced by the stayed judgment.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant CESTAT Customs Appeal jurisdiction remand

Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Metal and Ferro Alloys Ltd.

27 Aug 2019 · Hima Kohli; Asha Menon · 2019:DHC:7704-DB

The Delhi High Court held that CESTAT must decide appeals on merits including jurisdiction issues without being influenced by a stayed High Court judgment, setting aside the remand order to the original adjudicating authority.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT jurisdiction show cause notice Mangli Impex judgment

Commissioner of Customs v. Manoj Shah

27 Aug 2019 · Hima Kohli; Asha Menon

The Delhi High Court allowed the Commissioner of Customs' appeal, quashing CESTAT's remand orders and directing fresh adjudication uninfluenced by a stayed Supreme Court judgment.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant CESTAT remand jurisdiction Mangli Impex

Commissioner of Customs v. Neerumarketing Pvt. Ltd.

27 Aug 2019 · Hima Kohli; Asha Menon · 2019:DHC:7700-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside CESTAT orders remanding customs appeals based on a stayed Coordinate Bench decision and directed fresh disposal on merits uninfluenced by the stayed judgment.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant CESTAT Customs Appeal jurisdiction remand

Land & Building Dept, GNCTD v. Kasturi

27 Aug 2019 · D. N. Patel; C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:4188-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of the Land & Building Department, upholding the Single Judge's order permitting the respondent to submit additional documents and directing consideration of her application for alternate land allotment under the 1961 policy.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Allotment of Alternative Land Policy, 1961 land acquisition alternate plot allotment condonation of delay

M/S SEASONS FURNISHINGS LTD. v. ASSISTANT P.F. COMMISSIONER REGIONAL OFFICE DELHI EAST AND ANR.

27 Aug 2019 · Rekha Palli · 2019:DHC:4173

The Delhi High Court allowed a writ petition permitting the petitioner to file a delayed appeal against an EPF assessment order due to non-service of the order at the correct address, directing the Tribunal to hear the appeal on merits despite the expiry of limitation.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Employees Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Section 14B Section 7A appeal limitation

Narender Kumar Popli v. Sadan Batra

27 Aug 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:4163

The Delhi High Court allowed condonation of delay in filing the written statement subject to costs, enabling the petitioner to defend the suit and setting aside the order closing the right to defend.

civil appeal_allowed condonation of delay written statement right to defend procedural delay

Man Mohan @ Mastoo Ram v. Ravinder Kaur

27 Aug 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:4162

The Delhi High Court held that tenants are entitled to leave to defend eviction petitions where they disclose facts challenging the landlord's bona fide necessity, setting aside eviction orders and remanding for trial.

property appeal_allowed Significant eviction leave to defend Delhi Rent Control Act bona fide necessity

Man Mohan @ Mastoo Ram v. Ravinder Kaur

27 Aug 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:4161

The Delhi High Court held that tenants disclosing facts negating the landlord's bona fide requirement must be granted leave to defend eviction petitions, setting aside earlier orders rejecting such leave.

property appeal_allowed Significant eviction leave to defend bona fide requirement Delhi Rent Control Act

Man Mohan @ Mastoo Ram v. Ravinder Kaur

27 Aug 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:4168

The Delhi High Court held that tenants are entitled to leave to defend eviction petitions where they disclose facts challenging the landlord's bona fide necessity, setting aside eviction orders that denied such leave.

property appeal_allowed Significant eviction leave to defend bona fide necessity Delhi Rent Control Act

Imran v. State (NCT) of Delhi & Anr

27 Aug 2019 · Suresh Kumar Kait · 2019:DHC:4164

The Delhi High Court set aside the conviction under Section 138 NI Act and acquitted the petitioner after he paid the cheque amount to the complainant, also waiving legal costs due to his poor financial condition.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Cheque dishonour Payment of cheque amount Waiver of legal costs

Arshad Ali v. The State

27 Aug 2019 · Suresh Kumar Kait · 2019:DHC:4160

The Delhi High Court allowed the revision petition directing the trial court to permit the accused to recall and cross-examine a key eyewitness on material aspects to ensure a fair trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 311 Cr.P.C. cross-examination recall of witness eyewitness testimony