Delhi High Court

58,104 judgments

Year:

Virender Kumar Sehdeva v. Hema Sehgal & Anr.

02 May 2018 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2018:DHC:2857

The Delhi High Court held that obtaining mutation of property in violation of a status quo order by suppressing material facts amounts to contempt, but disposed of the petition on an unconditional apology and undertaking to maintain status quo.

civil contempt_petition_disposed Significant contempt of court status quo order mutation suppression of facts

Karam Chand v. Union of India

02 May 2018 · G.S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:2858-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that co-owners of jointly acquired land are entitled to equal enhanced compensation granted to other co-owners, even if they did not file appeals under the Land Acquisition Act.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 compensation co-owners enhanced compensation

Karam Chand v. Union of India

02 May 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:2859-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that co-owners of jointly acquired land are entitled to equal enhanced compensation awarded to other co-owners, even if they did not file appeals or references under the Land Acquisition Act.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 compensation co-owners enhanced compensation

Karam Chand v. Union of India

02 May 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:2856-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that co-owners of jointly acquired land are entitled to equal enhanced compensation awarded to other co-owners, even if they did not file appeals or references under the Land Acquisition Act.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 compensation co-owners enhanced compensation

Karam Chand v. Union of India

02 May 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:2855-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that co-owners of jointly acquired land are entitled to equal enhanced compensation awarded to any co-owner, even if they did not file appeals, affirming the principle of parity in land acquisition compensation.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 compensation co-owners enhanced compensation

New Delhi Traders Association v. Union of India

02 May 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A. K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:2829-DB

The Delhi High Court held that special heritage conservation provisions requiring prior permission override general exemptions for minor repairs under the Unified Delhi Building Bye-laws, 2016.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Unified Delhi Building Bye-laws 2016 Heritage Conservation Committee heritage buildings building permit exemption

Chatter Singh Rachhoya v. State

01 May 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:9092

The Delhi High Court held that police protection to anti-corruption activists must be based on current credible threats and allowed withdrawal of PSOs while directing local police surveillance.

criminal petition_dismissed police protection threat perception Prevention of Corruption Act witness protection

Rohit Gandhi & Ors v. State & Anr

01 May 2018 · Anu Malhotra · 2018:DHC:8455

The Delhi High Court quashed FIRs arising from matrimonial disputes on the basis of an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC despite the offences being non-compoundable.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 482 CrPC non-compoundable offences

Jamil Ahmad & Anr. v. Union of India

01 May 2018 · Najmi Waziri · 2018:DHC:2828

The Delhi High Court allowed compensation to the parents of a deceased passenger who died in a railway accident, holding that strict liability under Section 124-A of the Railways Act applies to bona fide passengers with valid tickets irrespective of negligence.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railways Act 1989 Section 124-A strict liability compensation

BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PRODUCTS LTD v. DBS BANK LTD & ANR

01 May 2018 · Siddharth Mridul; Deepa Sharma · 2018:DHC:2827-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a DRT order, emphasizing that statutory appeal before the DRAT is the appropriate remedy and cautioning against High Courts interfering under Article 226 when alternative remedies exist.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 Debt Recovery Tribunal Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal Article 226

Brahmaputra Cracker & Polymer Ltd v. RVR Projects Pvt Ltd

01 May 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A. K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:2826-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award directing release of withheld escalation payments in a construction contract dispute, emphasizing limited judicial interference with arbitration awards.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral award Escalation bill Contract delay Judicial interference

Sharmistha Sanyal & Anr v. Sujit Sen & Ors

01 May 2018 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2018:DHC:2825

The Delhi High Court rejected the plaintiffs' suit challenging a Partition Deed and upheld the validity of a Sale Deed conveying a specific portion, holding that the plaintiffs cannot claim undivided shares or partition of the entire property.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Partition Deed Sale Deed proportionate share Order VII Rule 11 CPC

MRT Signals Limited v. JMC Projects (India) Limited

01 May 2018 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2018:DHC:2824

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging an arbitral award that held the petitioner liable for forfeiture of bid security due to furnishing a false affidavit in a tender consortium bid.

civil petition_dismissed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Arbitral award Bid security forfeiture

Maruti Suzuki India Limited v. Delhi Auto General Finance Private Limited

01 May 2018 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2018:DHC:2820

The Delhi High Court held that Section 58(f) of the Transfer of Property Act applies to Delhi, setting aside the trial court's ruling and remanding the suit for fresh adjudication on equitable mortgage and recovery of title deeds.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 58(f) Transfer of Property Act equitable mortgage collateral security Delhi jurisdiction

Bhasin Infotech and Infrastructure Private Limited v. Ahmad Mian & Anr.

01 May 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:2823

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award, holding that disputes under ancillary agreements are arbitrable under a principal arbitration clause and that mere appearance of an arbitrator in connected matters does not establish bias.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Arbitrator impartiality Fifth Schedule Entry No.21

A.B. Grain Spirits Pvt. Ltd. v. Rakesh Kumar Pahwa

01 May 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:2822

The Delhi High Court upheld arbitral awards in favor of the respondent, emphasizing limited judicial review under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and rejecting the petitioner's challenge based on alleged unauthenticated accounts and non-production of the principal as witness.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 arbitral award judicial review

Madhushree Maitra and Ors. v. University of Delhi

01 May 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:2813-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the University of Delhi's enforcement of mandatory attendance rules for law students, dismissing claims of record theft and discrimination, and directed the Dean to consider any representations sympathetically.

administrative petition_dismissed attendance requirement professional course University of Delhi writ petition

Dharaneesh Raju Shetty v. Union of India; Sahil Mohd Zafar v. Union of India

01 May 2018 · Vipin Sanghi; P. S. Teji · 2018:DHC:2812-DB

Detention under COFEPOSA Act quashed for failure to supply relied upon documents in accessible form, violating constitutional right to effective representation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant COFEPOSA Act detention order relied upon documents right to representation

Dharaneesh Raju Shetty v. Union of India; Sahil Mohd Zafar v. Union of India

01 May 2018 · Vipin Sanghi; P. S. Teji · 2018:DHC:2811-DB

Detention under COFEPOSA Act quashed for failure to supply relied upon documents in an accessible form, violating the detenues' constitutional right to make effective representation.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant COFEPOSA Act detention order relied upon documents right to representation

Amardeep Malhotra v. State of GNCT of Delhi

01 May 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:2809

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a criminal case under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC, subject to bail bond and surety conditions, despite failure of settlement and after chargesheet filing.

criminal bail_granted anticipatory bail Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC Section 34 IPC