Delhi High Court

64,846 judgments

Year:

Manish Kumar; Rosy Dhawan v. Bureau of Indian Standards & Anr

07 Dec 2017 · Sunil Gaur · 2017:DHC:7631

The Delhi High Court directed reconsideration of challenged transfer orders with an opportunity of hearing and maintained status quo pending outcome.

administrative petition_allowed transfer order opportunity of hearing status quo administrative reconsideration

Manish Kumar; Rosy Dhawan v. Bureau of Indian Standards & Anr

07 Dec 2017 · Sunil Gaur · 2017:DHC:7632

The Delhi High Court directed reconsideration of challenged transfer orders with opportunity of hearing and maintained status quo pending outcome.

administrative petition_allowed transfer order opportunity of hearing status quo reconsideration

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Naresh Kumar & Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7648

The Delhi High Court allowed insurer's appeal granting recovery rights against the owner and driver for driving without a valid licence, reversing the tribunal's denial of such rights.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim insurance liability driving licence validity burden of proof

The State Govt of NCT of Delhi v. Hari Kishan @ Bunty & Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · Vipin Sanghi; P. S. Teji · 2017:DHC:7662-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's leave petition challenging the acquittal of accused in a rape and forced prostitution case, holding that the prosecutrix's testimony was not sufficiently corroborated to uphold conviction.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant rape prosecutrix testimony corroboration condonation of delay

Innovative Textiles Pvt. Ltd & Anr. v. Hem Chand Sharma & Anr.

07 Dec 2017 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2017:DHC:7650

The Delhi High Court held that Rule 4 of Order XXXVII CPC does not apply to set aside decrees passed after leave to defend is granted and the suit proceeds as an ordinary suit, dismissing the defendants' application to set aside such decree.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXXVII CPC Rule 4 leave to defend ex parte decree

BHARTI AXA GEN INS CO LTD. v. FAREEDA & ORS

07 Dec 2017 · J.R. Midha · 2017:DHC:7656
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court partly allowed the insurer's appeal in a motor accident claim by reducing compensation due to 40% contributory negligence and adjusting future prospects and loss of consortium awards.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation contributory negligence future prospects

Renu Khanna & Ors v. Joginder Pal Madan & Ors

07 Dec 2017 · J.R. Midha · 2017:DHC:7657
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court enhanced the motor accident compensation by correctly computing the deceased's income with future prospects and income tax deduction, reimbursed medical expenses, and reduced the interest rate to 9% per annum.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident compensation loss of dependency future prospects income tax deduction

Murari Lal Sharma and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · Hima Kohli; Rekha Palli · 2017:DHC:7652-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a petitioner whose dismissal by Summary Court Martial was converted to discharge is not barred from approaching the Armed Forces Tribunal, and dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Summary Court Martial Armed Forces Tribunal Section 3(o) Armed Forces Tribunal Act Section 165 Army Act

TV18 Home Shopping Network Limited v. M/S Indiaontime Express Pvt Ltd & Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · Manmohan J · 2017:DHC:7642

The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiff's suit for recovery of outstanding COD payments and interest by passing an ex parte decree under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC against defendants who failed to file a written statement or rebut the claims.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VIII Rule 10 CPC ex parte decree cash on delivery contractual breach

Kusum Lata v. Delhi Transport Corporation

07 Dec 2017 · Gita Mittal; C. Hari Shankar · 2017:DHC:7641-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of a writ petition alleging fake age proof by DTC employees, noting that the corporation had initiated an inquiry and would take lawful action accordingly.

administrative petition_dismissed fake proof of age Delhi Transport Corporation retirement age writ petition

Shubham Chawla v. The State

07 Dec 2017 · Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2017:DHC:7640

Anticipatory bail was refused to the petitioner accused of serious offences under Sections 354 and others IPC, as granting bail would impede investigation and prejudice justice.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant anticipatory bail Section 354 IPC criminal force outraging modesty

S.L. Thakural v. Delhi Consumer Cooperative Wholesale

07 Dec 2017 · Chander Shekhar · 2017:DHC:7649

The Delhi High Court held that claims for promotion and consequential benefits beyond reinstatement with full back wages must be pursued under the Industrial Disputes Act and cannot be granted in writ proceedings.

labor petition_dismissed Significant reinstatement with full back wages promotion and seniority Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Labour Court Award

Anil Kumar Rathore & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.

07 Dec 2017 · Sanjiv Khanna; Navin Chawla · 2017:DHC:7639-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking ante-dated promotion and seniority based on dispensation of minimum qualifying marks in the LDCE-2007 due to delay, laches, and absence of records.

administrative petition_dismissed Limited Departmental Competitive Examination LDCE 2007 promotion seniority

Travellers Exchange Corporation Limited & Ors. v. Celebrities Management Private Limited

07 Dec 2017 · S. P. Garg · 2017:DHC:7637

The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiffs to amend the plaint to elaborate territorial jurisdiction and deferred the defendant's jurisdictional challenge for consideration by the Roster Bench.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction amendment of plaint Order VI Rule 17 CPC Order VII Rule 10 CPC

Vikas Lohia v. Beena Sharma & Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7644

The Delhi High Court upheld the insurer's right to recover compensation from the vehicle owner for operating the bus without a valid permit, dismissing the owner's appeal against the Tribunal's grant of recovery rights.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant motor accident claim insurance policy breach valid permit Motor Vehicles Act Section 66

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Mamta Bhasin & Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7645

The Delhi High Court upheld the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's finding of negligence and insurer's liability in a fatal motor accident, applying the principle of res ipsa loquitur.

motor_accident_claims appeal_dismissed motor accident claim negligence res ipsa loquitur insurance liability

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Amarjeet Singh & Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7646
Cites 0 · Cited by 4

The Delhi High Court modified the compensation award in a motor accident claim by recalculating disability and future prospects, and remanded the insurer's breach of policy plea for fresh adjudication.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim functional disability future prospects insurance policy breach

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Naresh Kumar & Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7647

The Delhi High Court allowed the insurer's appeal granting recovery rights against the owner and driver after holding that the driver did not possess a valid driving licence at the time of the accident.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim insurance liability driving licence validity burden of proof

Lalit Mohan Madhan & Ors. v. Reliance Capital Ltd.

07 Dec 2017 · Navin Chawla · 2017:DHC:7638
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that SARFAESI Act proceedings and arbitration proceedings are complementary and can be pursued concurrently, dismissing the petition seeking to stay SARFAESI action during arbitration challenge.

civil petition_dismissed Significant SARFAESI Act Arbitration and Conciliation Act Section 13(2) SARFAESI Section 9 Arbitration Act

Siesta Hospitality Services Ltd. v. SpiceJet Ltd.

07 Dec 2017 · Navin Chawla · 2017:DHC:7636

The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award for ignoring vital contractual documents, holding that patent illegality under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act justifies interference when the arbitrator fails to consider material evidence governing the dispute.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Arbitral Award Patent Illegality