Delhi High Court

58,104 judgments

Year:

Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd. v. Afsana; Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd. v. Ass Mohammad @ Mamman

10 Jul 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:4046
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court reduced compensation awarded to deceased's legal heirs by 50% due to contributory negligence and aligned non-pecuniary damages with Supreme Court precedent, while upholding compensation to injured claimant.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim contributory negligence compensation reduction loss of dependency

Joginder Singh Choudhary & Anr. v. Sukhvir Singh Choudhary

10 Jul 2018 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2018:DHC:4045

The Delhi High Court directed the petitioners to file a civil suit within six weeks to resolve the dispute over the existence of the Arbitration Agreement, continuing interim protection only for that period.

arbitration other Arbitration Agreement Memorandum of Oral Partition Interim protection Civil suit

VED PRAKASH MITHAL & SONS v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.

10 Jul 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:4043
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the mandatory dispute resolution procedure in the arbitration agreement must be exhausted before invoking Section 11(6) for appointment of an arbitrator, dismissing the petition for non-compliance.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 11(6A) arbitration agreement

Budhiraja Electricals v. Union of India

10 Jul 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:4044

The Delhi High Court partly set aside an arbitral deduction for stolen materials holding the contractor not liable, but upheld rejection of claims for loss of profit and labor escalation due to lack of evidence and contractual non-compliance.

civil petition_partly_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Contractual liability Clause 17 contract

Singhal Udyog v. Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-1

10 Jul 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; P. S. Teji · 2018:DHC:4042-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the invocation of the extended period of limitation under the Central Excise Act against appellants who took advantage of fraudulent documents, dismissing their appeals despite their claims of being victims of fraud.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Central Excise Act, 1944 extended period of limitation proviso to Section 11 excise duty

ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. v. DR. ARUN KUMAR AND OTHERS

10 Jul 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:4039

The Delhi High Court allowed the insurer's appeal to grant recovery rights against the vehicle owner and driver due to an invalid permit, while upholding the compensation awarded to the claimants for death in a motor accident.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim insurance recovery rights valid permit compensation

Sachin Kumar @ Pankaj v. Mahender Singh & Ors.

10 Jul 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:4038

The Delhi High Court upheld the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's compensation award for a 12% permanent disability, dismissing the appeal for enhancement but allowing future claims after reassessment.

civil appeal_dismissed motor accident claim compensation quantum permanent disability disability certificate

Reliance General Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Dil Bagh Singh

10 Jul 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:4040
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court enhanced compensation for grievous injury in a motor accident, clarified application of Section 14 Motor Vehicles Act proviso, and increased interest rate to 9% per annum.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident compensation loss of earning capacity permanent disability Section 14 Motor Vehicles Act

Reliance General Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Dil Bagh Singh

10 Jul 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:4041
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim considering skilled worker wages, increased artificial limb costs, denied insurer recovery rights due to license validity, and awarded 9% interest.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation quantum loss of earning capacity artificial limbs cost

Anoop Kumar Aggarwal v. Shanti Sarup Chowhan

10 Jul 2018 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2018:DHC:4056
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that once title to immovable property is established, the plaintiff is entitled to possession unless the defendant proves a right to continue possession, and set aside lower courts' denial of possession due to failure to prove trespass.

civil appeal_allowed Significant recovery of possession title suit adverse possession tenancy

Pramod v. Cement Corporation of India

10 Jul 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2018:DHC:4024

The Delhi High Court set aside the removal of an employee for unauthorized absence on medical grounds, emphasizing due process, fair consideration of medical certificates, and proportionality in disciplinary action.

labor appeal_allowed Significant medical leave unauthorized absence disciplinary proceedings medical board report

Kasif v. State NCT of Delhi

10 Jul 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:4023-DB

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant of murder under Section 302 IPC due to unreliable DNA evidence and weak circumstantial proof arising from serious investigative lapses.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC DNA evidence chain of circumstantial evidence last seen witness

Harish v. State

10 Jul 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:4022-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant of murder due to unreliable eyewitness testimony, doubtful weapon recovery, and failure to independently prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt after acquittal of related robbery charges.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC murder sole eyewitness testimony benefit of doubt

Naresh Goyal v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

10 Jul 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:4049

The High Court set aside the discharge of the accused in a forgery case, holding that a prima facie case existed and directing trial to proceed under Sections 465 and 471 IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant forgery use of forged document Section 465 IPC Section 471 IPC

Sunita v. State & Ors.

10 Jul 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:4035

The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs arising from a neighborhood quarrel based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR settlement Section 482 CrPC cross FIR

Sunita v. State & Ors.; Sunil Kumar v. State & Ors.

10 Jul 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:4036

The Delhi High Court quashed FIRs arising from a neighborly quarrel after the parties amicably settled their disputes and undertook to maintain peace.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR settlement minor offenses Section 341 IPC

Jitender @ Kodi & Ors. v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

10 Jul 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:4037

The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs arising from a neighborly dispute following an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC compromise in criminal cases cross FIR

Jitender @ Kodi & Ors. v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

10 Jul 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:4034

The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs arising from a neighborly quarrel on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC compromise criminal proceedings

Sarwan Kumar v. State

10 Jul 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:4033

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant due to non-compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards under Section 42 of the NDPS Act in a night search, setting aside his conviction under Section 20(c) NDPS Act.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant NDPS Act Section 42 NDPS Act search and seizure night search

Shri Hanshu Mittal & Anr. v. State & Another

10 Jul 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:4032

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR registered under Sections 354A, 323, 427, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties and the complainant's decision not to pursue the complaint.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR settlement Section 354A IPC Section 323 IPC