Delhi High Court

58,104 judgments

Year:

Shokshista Shukrova v. State & Ors.

17 Jul 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:4254

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking transfer of investigation and security, holding that DNA evidence confirmed the victim’s identity and no grounds existed to interfere with the ongoing investigation.

criminal petition_dismissed DNA analysis transfer of investigation false evidence kidnapping

Dr Nevin Kishore v. Medical Council of India and Ors

17 Jul 2018 · Vibhu Bahru · 2018:DHC:4255

The Delhi High Court upheld the Medical Council of India's order removing a physician from the medical register for one year for medical negligence in failing to diagnose cardiomegaly evident on a chest X-Ray.

medical negligence petition_dismissed Significant medical negligence interpretation of X-Ray Medical Council of India disciplinary action

Bhoop Singh Gautam v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi

17 Jul 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:4256

The Delhi High Court upheld the discharge of accused under the SC/ST (POA) Act due to absence of evidence that derogatory casteist remarks were made in public view or in presence of witnesses and refused to transfer the investigation.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 3(1)(r) Section 3(1)(s) discharge

Dr Hemant Tewari v. Medical Council of India and Ors

17 Jul 2018 · Vibhu Bahkru · 2018:DHC:4257

The Delhi High Court upheld the Medical Council of India's Ethics Committee's jurisdiction to hear appeals against State Medical Council orders on medical negligence, dismissing the petition challenging removal of the petitioner's name from the Medical Register.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Medical Council of India Ethics Committee Medical negligence Professional misconduct

Aura Synergy India Ltd & Anr v. M/S New Age False Ceiling Co Pvt Ltd & Anr

17 Jul 2018 · Manmohan · 2018:DHC:4250

The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiffs' application to amend the plaint to disclose previously suppressed facts, holding that suppression disentitles a party from equitable relief and cannot be cured by belated amendment.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant amendment of plaint suppression of facts Order 6 Rule 17 CPC passing off

Radico Khaitan Limited v. Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Delhi

17 Jul 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A. K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:4249-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the CESTAT must decide appeals on merits and limited remand to specific issues where the genuineness of a binding agreement was already established and undisputed.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Central Excise Act, 1944 Section 35G service tax show cause notice

The Commissioner of Income Tax v. STEAG Energy Services GmbH

17 Jul 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A.K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:4248-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Settlement Commission's order in favor of STEAG Energy Services GmbH, dismissing the Revenue's challenge on TDS, royalty, and transfer pricing adjustments for AY 2009-10 to 2014-15.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Income Tax Settlement Commission Section 40(a)(iii) royalty Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi)

Dal Singar and Ors. v. Material Movement Pvt Ltd

17 Jul 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2018:DHC:4247

The Delhi High Court upheld the Labour Court's finding that the respondent's factory closure was genuine and lawful, dismissing the petitioners' claim for reinstatement and back wages under the Industrial Disputes Act.

labor petition_dismissed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 25-FFA Section 25-FFF closure of undertaking

Santosh Kaur Sangari v. University of Delhi

17 Jul 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2018:DHC:4243

The Delhi High Court held that University employees who opted within extended cut-off dates are entitled to switch from CPF to GPF pension scheme, overruling the University's rejection as arbitrary.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) General Provident Fund (GPF) pension scheme conversion University of Delhi

Ishwar Saini & Ors. v. The State & Anr.

17 Jul 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:4244

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 308 and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement between related parties, holding that continuation of criminal proceedings would be futile.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 308 IPC Section 34 IPC settlement

Ghulam Mustafa v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

17 Jul 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:4245

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR for electricity theft after the parties settled the dispute and the complainant received the settlement amount, emphasizing the ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR theft of electricity Section 379 IPC Section 135 Indian Electricity Act

Asha Rani v. State (NCT of Delhi)

17 Jul 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:4251

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to a woman accused under Sections 420 and 120B IPC, applying the proviso to Section 437(1) CrPC to adopt a liberal approach given her status and lack of prior conviction, subject to stringent conditions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Section 437(1) CrPC proviso to Section 437(1) woman accused

MODI-MUNDIPHARMA PVT. LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

17 Jul 2018 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2018:DHC:4246
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a pharmaceutical formulation employing Controlled Release technology is not subject to price control under DPCO-2013 unless specifically listed in the National List of Essential Medicines, 2015.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Drug Price Control Order 2013 National List of Essential Medicines 2015 Controlled Release formulation Scheduled formulation

Navin Chander Anand v. Union Bank of India & Ors.

17 Jul 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:4241
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

A single co-owner cannot unilaterally terminate tenancy or claim mesne profits against a tenant if other co-owners oppose the termination in jointly owned property.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant co-owner co-landlord termination of tenancy mesne profits

Uttam v. State

17 Jul 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:4242-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a wife for the murder of her husband based on a complete chain of circumstantial and forensic evidence, rejecting her defense of false implication.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence Section 302 IPC Section 106 Indian Evidence Act homicidal strangulation

Abhilasha Enterprises v. New Delhi Municipal Council

17 Jul 2018 · V. Kameswar Rao, J · 2018:DHC:4240

The Delhi High Court upheld the lawful forfeiture of earnest money by NDMC where the successful bidder failed to execute the license deed within stipulated time and raised afterthought objections, distinguishing the cited Supreme Court precedent.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant earnest money forfeiture public auction license deed as is where is basis

Ritu Saxena v. J.S. Grover and Another

17 Jul 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:4239

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against dismissal of a suit for specific performance, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove continuous readiness and willingness, particularly financial capacity, as required under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant specific performance readiness and willingness financial capacity Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act

Ritu Saxena v. J.S. Grover and Another

17 Jul 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:4239

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against the trial court's rejection of specific performance, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove continuous readiness and financial capacity as required under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant specific performance readiness and willingness financial capacity Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act

TIGERS WORLDWIDE PVT LTD v. MAL CARGO PVT LTD

17 Jul 2018 · JAYANT NATH · 2018:DHC:4280

The Delhi High Court held that a partial payment resets the limitation period under section 19 of the Limitation Act, allowing a winding up petition based on unpaid dues supported by dishonored cheques to be admitted with appointment of a Provisional Liquidator.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant winding up petition Companies Act 1956 limitation period section 19 Limitation Act

Reserve Bank of India v. Crystal Credit Corpn. Ltd.

17 Jul 2018 · Jayant Nath · 121 (2005) DLT 375

The Delhi High Court held that a bona fide purchaser acquiring company property through a court auction prior to winding up and appointment of the Official Liquidator is entitled to retain possession, and such sale is valid under Section 536 of the Companies Act, 1956.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant Section 536 Companies Act 1956 winding up Official Liquidator bona fide purchaser