Delhi High Court

58,104 judgments

Year:

Orcus Capital Advisors Pvt. Ltd. v. Ajay Chandra

27 Feb 2018 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2018:DHC:1463

The Delhi High Court held that a creditor can proceed against a personal guarantor for loan recovery despite a moratorium on the principal debtor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, dismissing the defendant's leave to defend application.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant personal guarantor liability Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code moratorium joint and several liability leave to defend

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

27 Feb 2018 · Anu Malhotra · 2018:DHC:8400

The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs under various IPC sections following a voluntary mediation settlement between neighbors, emphasizing the court's power to prevent unnecessary litigation and maintain peace.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR amicable settlement mediation Section 482 CrPC

Sanjiv Gupta v. M/S PMKIMPEXPRIVATE LIMITED

27 Feb 2018 · Anu Malhotra · 2018:DHC:8479

The Delhi High Court set aside a summoning order under Section 138 NI Act for non-compliance with mandatory inquiry under Section 202 CrPC when accused resides outside the Magistrate's jurisdiction, directing fresh inquiry.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 202 CrPC Summoning order Jurisdiction Negotiable Instruments Act

Kiran Gupta & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr.

27 Feb 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal

The Delhi High Court dismissed as withdrawn two writ petitions challenging land acquisition proceedings, allowing petitioners liberty to file fresh petitions and keeping respondents' legal objections open.

property appeal_dismissed Procedural land acquisition Section 24(2) 2013 Act Section 12(2) Land Acquisition Act 1894 notice requirement

Ranvir v. Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors

27 Feb 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:8531-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed as withdrawn a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings where possession and compensation had been effected.

administrative appeal_dismissed land acquisition physical possession compensation writ petition

Yamaha Motor India Pvt. Ltd. v. Amit Jyoti

27 Feb 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:9367

The Delhi High Court set aside the dismissal of a Section 138 NI Act complaint for non-appearance due to lawyers' strike, condoned delay in filing leave to appeal, and remanded the case for trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 256 Cr.P.C. dismissal for non-appearance lawyers strike

Surender @ Dheeraj v. State

27 Feb 2018 · S. Muralidhar; I. S. Mehta · 2018:DHC:1442-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside convictions for offences not formally charged, emphasizing the necessity of proper charge framing and a complete chain of circumstantial evidence for criminal convictions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant criminal conspiracy circumstantial evidence charge framing Section 120-B IPC

ASCOT HOTELS & RESORTS PVT LTD v. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

27 Feb 2018 · Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:1436

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's conditional interim stay requiring deposit of amounts under Sections 14-B and 7-Q of the EPF Act, clarifying that pre-deposit under Section 7-O applies only to Section 7-A orders.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Section 7-O pre-deposit Section 14-B damages Section 7-Q interest

Vijeta Projects and Infrastructure Ltd. v. Tata Power Company Ltd.

27 Feb 2018 · Yogesh Khanna · 2018:DHC:1435

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition restraining invocation of bank guarantees, holding that invocation must be in terms of the guarantee and that no fraud or irretrievable harm was established to justify injunction.

civil petition_dismissed Significant bank guarantee invocation Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 contractual obligations

CONVENTION HOTELS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. AGER HOTELS GROUP LIMITED

27 Feb 2018 · Yogesh Khanna · 2018:DHC:1433

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award ordering refund of share subscription money with interest, rejecting challenges based on FEMA, RBI circulars, and public policy, and affirmed limited judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Share Subscription Agreement Refund of share subscription money Interest on refund

North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. DCM Limited

27 Feb 2018 · Vipin Sanghi; Rekha Palli · 2018:DHC:1434-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the sealing of DCM's Flatted Factory Complex directed by the Monitoring Committee and NDMC, holding such action unlawful during pendency of appeal and beyond the Committee's jurisdiction.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Monitoring Committee Sealing order Flatted Factory Complex Conversion of use

Dal Chand Gautam v. Panickers Travels India Pvt. Ltd.

27 Feb 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:1431

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that construction carried out as per sanctioned plans with regularized deviations is not unauthorized and that the plaintiff failed to prove structural damage or credible damages to his property.

civil appeal_dismissed sanctioned building plan construction damage municipal corporation expert evidence

M.C. Luthra v. Ashok Kumar Khanna

27 Feb 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:1439

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's decision denying forfeiture of earnest money where no breach by the buyer was found and emphasized that forfeiture under an agreement to sell requires clear contractual terms and proof of loss or must be reasonable under Section 74 of the Indian Contract Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant earnest money forfeiture agreement to sell breach of contract

Santosh Malik v. State (Govt. of NCT)

27 Feb 2018 · S. Muralidhar; I. S. Mehta · 2018:DHC:1437-DB

The Delhi High Court overturned the trial court's acquittal and convicted the accused for murder based on reliable child witness testimony and a complete chain of circumstantial evidence corroborated by prior incidents and complaints.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant appeal against acquittal child witness testimony circumstantial evidence murder

SAM (INDIA) BUILTWELL (P) LTD. v. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

27 Feb 2018 · Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:1438

The Delhi High Court held that the EPF Tribunal can grant conditional interim stay on orders under Sections 14-B and 7-Q without the Section 7-O pre-deposit requirement applicable only to Section 7-A orders.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Section 7-O Section 14-B Section 7-Q

Vijay Kumar Agarwal v. The State

27 Feb 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:1443

The Delhi High Court restored the revision petition challenging framing of charges, holding that the Revisional Court erred in dismissing it on the ground that charges were not framed.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant framing of charges Section 207 Cr.P.C. revision petition Indian Penal Code Sections 448, 457, 380, 341

Stadtmueller Gabriele v. Union of India

27 Feb 2018 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2018:DHC:1447

The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte dismissal of a naturalization certificate review application due to lack of proper notice and directed a fresh hearing ensuring compliance with natural justice.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Citizenship Act, 1955 certificate of naturalization review application ex-parte order

National Highway Authority of India v. Transstroy (India) Ltd

27 Feb 2018 · Yogesh Khanna · 2018:DHC:1432

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral tribunal's rejection of a belated counterclaim for non-compliance with mandatory amicable settlement procedures and procedural timelines under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 23(2A) counterclaim amicable settlement

Union of India v. Manjit Singh Bali

26 Feb 2018 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2018:DHC:1425

The Delhi High Court held that a public authority cannot evade its RTI disclosure obligations by transferring information to another authority and must demonstrate how disclosure would impede prosecution to withhold information under Section 8(1)(h).

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Right to Information Act, 2005 Section 6 RTI Section 8(1)(h) RTI Section 11 RTI

Venkata Krishnan v. Bank of Baroda

26 Feb 2018 · Indermeet Kaur · 2018:DHC:8657

The Delhi High Court permitted withdrawal of petitions concerning a leased property, dismissed the petitions as withdrawn, and directed handover of the property to the Bank's Receiver upon lease expiry.

civil appeal_dismissed Procedural withdrawal of petition lease deed property possession Bank of Baroda