Delhi High Court

49,110 judgments

Year:

Rohtas Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

21 Jan 2019 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2019:DHC:396

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the trial court's rejection of adverse possession claim over a valuable government property, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove open, hostile, and continuous possession.

civil appeal_dismissed adverse possession possession Specific Relief Act municipal tax

M/S KHUSHI RAM BEHARI LAL v. M/S JASWANT SINGH BALWANT SINGH

21 Jan 2019 · SURESH KUMAR KAIT · 2019:DHC:399

The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition setting aside the IPAB order and directed registration of the petitioner's trademark "TRAIN" in Class 30, holding that the respondent's prior registration was not conclusively established due to forged documents and that the petitioner qualified for registration under Section 12 of the Trade Marks Act.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trademark registration Prior user Section 11 Trade Marks Act Section 12 Trade Marks Act

Meinhardt Singapore Pte. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi

21 Jan 2019 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; PRATEEK JALAN · 2019:DHC:397-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the imposition of 100% penalty on a service tax assessee for delayed payment of tax collected, rejecting financial hardship as a defense and emphasizing strict compliance with statutory timelines for penalty reduction.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant service tax penalty Section 73(4) Section 78

Raj Kumar Sehgal v. Union of India and Ors.

21 Jan 2019 · Vipin Sanghi; A. K. Chawla · 2019:DHC:398-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT’s order denying interest on delayed retiral dues during pending disciplinary proceedings dropped with displeasure, holding that such exoneration is not an honourable acquittal under Rule 68 of CCS (Pension) Rules.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant interest on delayed gratuity CCS Pension Rules 1972 honourable acquittal disciplinary proceedings

Akhtar v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

21 Jan 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:400

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the petitioner in a case involving minor injuries and a trivial dispute, relying on medical evidence and without prejudice to cross FIRs.

criminal bail_granted bail Section 308 IPC Section 323 IPC Section 34 IPC

Shiv Avtar Tyagi v. The State of NCT of Delhi

21 Jan 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:404

The Delhi High Court granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in a criminal case subject to his cooperation with the investigation and appearance before the Investigating Officer.

criminal bail_granted pre-arrest bail cooperation with investigation Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC

Krishan Kumar @ Pintu v. State of NCT of Delhi

21 Jan 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:407

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under multiple IPC sections on the basis of an amicable compromise between parties, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC as guided by Supreme Court precedent.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR compromise inherent jurisdiction

Gurdeep Singh v. State & Anr.

21 Jan 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:402

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 379 IPC and 135 Electricity Act based on a No Dues Certificate and settled dispute, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR No Dues Certificate inherent jurisdiction

Arun Kumar v. State & Anr.

21 Jan 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:403

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute on the ground of amicable settlement and mutual divorce, exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC Section 406 IPC

Gabriel India Ltd & Ors. v. Arvind Walia

21 Jan 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:406

The Delhi High Court quashed the summoning order and criminal complaint following an amicable compromise and settlement between the parties.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of summoning order compromise and settlement deed criminal complaint amicable settlement

Bhasin Tobaccos Ltd. & Ors. v. Gambro Nexim (India) Medical Ltd. & Ors.

21 Jan 2019 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2019:DHC:415

The Delhi High Court held that civil courts lack jurisdiction over recovery matters under the DRT Act, mandating aggrieved parties to appeal before the DRT, and rejected the plaintiffs' suit for specific performance as premature and barred.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 Debt Recovery Tribunal Order VII Rule 11 CPC Second Schedule Income Tax Act

Sanjay & Ors. v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

21 Jan 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:405

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 325, 380, 448, 452, and 34 IPC on the ground of amicable settlement between parties, applying the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR settlement between parties inherent jurisdiction

CBI v. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal

21 Jan 2019 · R. K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:408

The Delhi High Court set aside orders directing the return of seized documents to the accused, allowing the CBI to retain crucial evidence pending the Supreme Court's decision on the quashing of prosecution.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC seized documents return of documents inherent jurisdiction

Kuldeep Kaur Through LRs v. State & Anr.

21 Jan 2019 · R. K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:411

The Delhi High Court allowed further investigation by the police under Section 173(8) CrPC and stayed criminal proceedings pending its completion, clarifying that courts cannot direct further investigation after cognizance but may stay proceedings to ensure fairness.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 173(8) CrPC further investigation power of attorney forgery criminal court powers

Rajkumar Pathak v. Nidhi Verma

21 Jan 2019 · R. K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:412

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition by a third party seeking inquiry under Section 340 CrPC in domestic violence proceedings, holding that only parties with personal stake can pursue such actions.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 340 CrPC Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 locus standi perjury

S.K. Tanwar v. Union of India and Anr.

21 Jan 2019 · Vipin Sanghi; A. K. Chawla · 2019:DHC:410-DB

The High Court held that preliminary inquiry findings are not final and upheld the initiation of formal disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner under Rule 14 of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, dismissing his writ petition.

administrative petition_dismissed preliminary inquiry Internal Complaints Committee sexual harassment disciplinary proceedings

Amit Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

21 Jan 2019 · R.K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:413

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 420 and 406 IPC, holding that incomplete compromise and lack of full cooperation by complainants do not justify quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of criminal proceedings compromise in criminal cases cheating

WIANXX IMPEX PVT. LTD. & ORS. v. EVERSHINE BUILD WELL PVT. LTD.

21 Jan 2019 · JAYANT NATH · 2019:DHC:389
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside the arbitral tribunal's termination of the petitioners' counter claim for non-payment of fees, holding that the tribunal must exercise its discretion fairly and allow reasonable opportunity to pay pending fees.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 38 termination of arbitral proceedings arbitral fees

Mustaqeem & Ors. v. Faiyaz @ Faizab & Anr

21 Jan 2019 · Vinod Goel · 2019:DHC:414

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition, holding that petitioners who accepted costs for setting aside an ex-parte decree are estopped from challenging that order.

civil appeal_dismissed ex-parte decree setting aside Order IX Rule 13 CPC Section 151 CPC

M/S PIECO INDIA ENGINEERING CO PVT LTD v. M/S SHATABDI SWITCHGEARS & CONTROL PVT. LTD.

21 Jan 2019 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2019:DHC:394

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's decree for recovery of dues, holding that a third party's payment on behalf of the debtor constitutes acknowledgment resetting the limitation period.

civil appeal_dismissed limitation period acknowledgment of debt third party payment Section 18 Limitation Act