Delhi High Court

47,915 judgments

Year:

State v. Swatantra Bharat & Ors.

29 Mar 2019 · Siddharth Mridul; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2019:DHC:1849-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a rape case due to inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's testimony, lack of corroborative medical and forensic evidence, and the possibility of false implication arising from a property dispute.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant prosecutrix testimony rape conviction medical evidence forensic evidence

INDIAHIT.COM PRIVATE LIMITED v. OL

29 Mar 2019 · Jayant Nath · 2019:DHC:1856

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition for voluntary dissolution of INDIAHIT.COM PRIVATE LIMITED after confirming compliance with statutory winding up procedures under the Companies Act, 1956.

corporate petition_allowed Companies Act 1956 Section 497(6) voluntary winding up declaration of solvency

State v. Joshim

29 Mar 2019 · Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2019:DHC:1855

The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's petition seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal of the accused in a theft case, holding that the trial court's judgment was not perverse and the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant acquittal leave to appeal presumption of innocence appreciation of evidence

Hargyan Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

29 Mar 2019 · I. S. Mehta · 2019:DHC:1834

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking allotment of an alternative plot after a 20-year delay, holding that delay and non-compliance barred relief under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.

administrative petition_dismissed writ petition mandamus alternative plot allotment land acquisition

Sohan Pal Goel v. Shaleen Goel

29 Mar 2019 · I. S. Mehta · 2019:DHC:1833

The Delhi High Court allowed the appellant's appeal to file additional ownership documents and remanded the possession suit for fresh trial to ensure justice and equity.

civil appeal_allowed Significant possession suit additional evidence Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Section 107 CPC

Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Co. v. Riyaz Khan

29 Mar 2019 · I. S. Mehta · 2019:DHC:1837

The Delhi High Court dismissed UPSRTC's appeal and upheld the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's compensation award to a passenger injured due to the driver's rash and negligent driving.

civil appeal_dismissed Motor Accident Claims Tribunal compensation rash and negligent driving disability certificate

Neera Chopra and Anr. v. Deepa Bhardwaj & Ors.

29 Mar 2019 · Manmohan · 2019:DHC:1830

The Delhi High Court rejected the suit claiming ancestral right over a property allotted as government grant to a displaced person, holding the plaint disclosed no cause of action and that the property was self-acquired, not ancestral.

civil petition_dismissed Significant cause of action ancestral property self-acquired property displaced persons grant

Bank of Baroda v. Susmita Saha

29 Mar 2019 · Suresh Kumar Kait · 2019:DHC:1829

The Delhi High Court upheld the Chief Commissioner's order directing Bank of Baroda to employ a physically disabled candidate who completed her diploma course with delay but was entitled to reasonable accommodation and protection under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities reasonable accommodation legitimate expectation

C S Aggarwal v. State

29 Mar 2019 · J.R. Midha · Test.Cas.8/1995

The Delhi High Court held that in cases where a will is surrounded by suspicious circumstances, the propounder bears a heavy burden to prove its genuineness and satisfy the court's judicial conscience before probate can be granted.

civil other Significant will probate Indian Succession Act suspicious circumstances

IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD v. VIKAS KUMAR @ VICKY & ORS

29 Mar 2019 · J.R. Midha · 2019:DHC:1845

The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal, upholding the Claims Tribunal's compensation award to the injured scooter rider for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident.

civil appeal_dismissed motor vehicle accident compensation disability pain and suffering

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR v. AMARJEET SINGH

29 Mar 2019 · Vipin Sanghi; Rekha Palli · 2019:DHC:1850-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a temporary police officer appointed under Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 can be validly terminated under Rule 5(1)(a) despite appointment against a permanent post, setting aside the Tribunal's quashing of the termination notice.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant temporary government servant Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 termination of service probation

M/S Rajasthan Cylinders & Containers Ltd v. Competition Commission of India

29 Mar 2019 · R.K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:1827

The Delhi High Court held that failure to pay penalty imposed by the Competition Commission under Section 43 can independently constitute a criminal offence under Section 42(3) without violating double jeopardy protections, dismissing petitions challenging summoning orders.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Competition Act, 2002 Section 42(3) Section 43 penalty double jeopardy

M/S Taurian Overseas v. M/S Soni Impex and Ors.

29 Mar 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:1835

The High Court quashed the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, holding that the petitioner successfully rebutted the statutory presumption in a connected case, which was not disclosed to the Appellate Court, warranting acquittal.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 Cheque dishonour Statutory presumption

Dheeraj Jaggi & Ors. v. State & Anr.

29 Mar 2019 · R.K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:1838

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute based on an amicable settlement and dissolution of marriage, emphasizing the court's inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. Section 498A IPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute

State (NCT of Delhi) v. Sanjeev Hans & Ors.

29 Mar 2019 · Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2019:DHC:1852

The High Court dismissed the State's petition seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal of accused persons due to material contradictions in prosecution evidence and absence of reliable medical proof.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant acquittal contradictions in prosecution evidence medical evidence post-mortem report

Prem Chand Kumar and Ors. v. Railway Protection Force & Ors.

29 Mar 2019 · S. Muralidhar; Sanjeev Narula · 2019:DHC:1828-DB

The Delhi High Court held that reserved category candidates who secure higher marks than unreserved cut-offs and only avail eligibility relaxations are entitled to appointment against unreserved vacancies in RPF ancillary staff recruitment.

administrative petition_allowed Significant reserved category candidates unreserved vacancies relaxation in eligibility criteria Railway Protection Force recruitment

Harinder Singh & Ors. v. Lt. Governor & Anr.

29 Mar 2019 · S. Muralidhar; I. S. Mehta · 2019:DHC:1836-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioners' claim for restoration of land acquired and compensation under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, holding that compensation paid and possession taken bars revival of stale claims.

property petition_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Section 24(2) 2013 Act Compensation Physical Possession

Fiberfill Engineers v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited

29 Mar 2019 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2019:DHC:2316

The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award imposing liquidated damages without findings on loss or injury, holding that such damages require proof of loss and time ceased to be of essence due to contract extensions.

civil appeal_allowed Significant liquidated damages time essence of contract Section 34 Arbitration Act Section 74 Indian Contract Act

Fagun Gaur v. State

29 Mar 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:2314

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279 and 337 IPC on the basis of a bona fide error and settlement between parties, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC bona fide error compromise

Ram Brij Sagar & Anr v. The State & Anr

29 Mar 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:2312

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under the Trade Marks and Copyright Acts based on a settlement between parties, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in commercial disputes with predominant civil elements.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC Trade Marks Act, 1999 Copyright Act, 1957