Delhi High Court

64,846 judgments

Year:

Alstom T & D India Ltd v. M/S Aradhya Infra-Tech Pvt. Ltd.

07 Dec 2017 · Navin Chawla · 2017:DHC:7635

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award granting the respondent's claims and held that liquidated damages require proof of actual loss, dismissing the petition challenging the award.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award Section 34 Arbitration Act Liquidated Damages Section 74 Indian Contract Act

Suresh Chander v. Sabir Ali

07 Dec 2017 · S.P. Garg · 2017:DHC:7634

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging civil court jurisdiction over Wakf Board property and directed that dispossession must follow due process of law.

civil appeal_dismissed Wakf Act, 1995 Section 85 civil court jurisdiction dispossession

ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd v. Raj Singh & Ors

07 Dec 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7655

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation for a motor accident victim due to increased disability and held the insurer entitled to recover the amount from the driver and owner for breach of insurance policy conditions.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation enhancement insurance policy breach recovery rights

ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd v. Raj Singh & Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7654

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation for a motor accident victim following amputation and held the insurer liable to pay but entitled to recover from the driver and owner due to breach of insurance policy conditions.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation enhancement functional disability future prospects

National Insurance Co Ltd v. Lalita and Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7653

The Delhi High Court held that an insurer must pay compensation despite breach of policy terms due to invalid driving licence but is entitled to recover from the driver and owner, while adjusting damages and interest in line with Supreme Court rulings.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim insurance liability breach of policy driving licence

National Insurance Co Ltd v. Lalita and Ors.

07 Dec 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7651

The Delhi High Court held the insurer liable to pay compensation despite policy breach but granted it recovery rights against the driver and owner, while adjusting damages and interest in line with Supreme Court rulings.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim insurance liability breach of policy terms loss of dependency

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

07 Dec 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7643
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

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

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim functional disability future prospects compensation calculation

R.L.TRADERS v. Income Tax Officer Ward 47(1)

07 Dec 2017 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; SANJEEV SACHDEVA · 2017:DHC:7633-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal upholding the addition of unexplained cash credits under Section 68 and the consequent penalty under Section 271 of the Income Tax Act, despite absence of cross-examination of the creditor.

tax appeal_dismissed Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 68 Section 271 penalty cash credits

HIMALYA INTERNATIONAL LTD. v. HIMALAYA DRUGS COMPANY

07 Dec 2017 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2017:DHC:7661

The Delhi High Court dismissed a premature suit for damages for a wrongful injunction, holding that such claims must await the final decision in the original suit where the injunction was granted.

civil petition_dismissed Significant wrongful injunction damages cause of action Section 95 CPC

M/S M.U EATING POINT & ANR. v. CAPT. AMAN AND ORS.

07 Dec 2017 · JAYANT NATH · 2017:DHC:7660

The Delhi High Court held that the plaintiffs are the rightful owners of the registered trademark "TUNDAY KABABI" and granted an ex-parte injunction against defendants using the deceptively similar mark "LUCKNOW WALE TUNDAY KABABI" for trademark infringement.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Trademark infringement TUNDAY KABABI Trade Marks Act, 1999 Well-known trademark

A J v. S P

07 Dec 2017 · Siddharth Mridul; Deepa Sharma · 2017:DHC:7659-DB

The Delhi High Court recorded a lawful settlement resolving all matrimonial claims including maintenance, custody, and property, and disposed of the pending appeal accordingly.

family appeal_allowed matrimonial dispute settlement maintenance alimony

Vinod Bangwal v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi

07 Dec 2017 · Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2017:DHC:7612

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's bail application in a criminal case involving forgery and conspiracy to usurp property, holding that the serious nature of offences and active role of accused justified denial of bail.

criminal appeal_dismissed bail Section 439 Cr.P.C. forgery criminal conspiracy

Ravinder Kumar Jatav v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

07 Dec 2017 · Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2017:DHC:7613

The Delhi High Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner alleged to be the mastermind of a bank fraud, holding that bail should be denied at the preliminary investigation stage when custodial interrogation is necessary.

criminal appeal_dismissed anticipatory bail Section 438 Cr.P.C. fraud conspiracy

Sanjay Jain v. State of NCT of Delhi

07 Dec 2017 · Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2017:DHC:7614

The Delhi High Court dismissed anticipatory bail to the accused in a serious sexual harassment and criminal intimidation case, emphasizing the need to protect the investigation and prevent tampering or intimidation.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant anticipatory bail Section 354 IPC outraging modesty sexual harassment

Wajid Khan v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi

07 Dec 2017 · Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2017:DHC:7628

The Delhi High Court refused anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused of kidnapping and related non-compoundable offences, holding that bail is not warranted at the preliminary investigation stage despite a reported compromise.

criminal bail_denied anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC kidnapping non-compoundable offences

M/S. ULTRATECH CEMENT LIMITED v. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

07 Dec 2017 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; S.P. GARG · 2017:DHC:7629-DB
Cites 5 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a rehabilitation scheme under SICA is not binding on a State without its consent, and a petitioner is not entitled to refund of VAT and Electricity Duty paid despite exemption provisions, as refund claims lie outside BIFR jurisdiction and are barred by unjust enrichment and limitation.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Sick Industrial Companies Act rehabilitation scheme tax exemption VAT refund

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd

07 Dec 2017 · S. Muralidhar; Prathiba M. Singh · 2017:DHC:7630-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the ITAT's deletion of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, holding that penalty is not warranted where the issue is debatable.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 271(1)(c) Penalty Concealment of income

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.

07 Dec 2017 · S. Muralidhar; Prathiba M. Singh · 2017:DHC:7627-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, holding that duty drawback amounts not accrued or payable cannot be included in the taxable income of the assessee.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant duty drawback taxable income accrual of income Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

Sunbeam Auto Private Limited v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

07 Dec 2017 · S. Muralidhar; Prathiba M. Singh · 2017:DHC:7626-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that sales tax subsidy is a capital receipt, set aside the revenue's assessment orders treating it as revenue receipt, and allowed the petitioner's revision application under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act.

tax appeal_allowed Significant sales tax subsidy capital receipt revenue receipt Section 264 Income Tax Act

Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

07 Dec 2017 · S. Muralidhar; Prathiba M. Singh · 2017:DHC:7623-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that amounts deposited in the Central Excise Personal Ledger Account are deductible under Section 43B as actual payment of excise duty liability, but unutilized MODVAT credit balances are not deductible until utilized.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 43B Income Tax Act Central Excise Personal Ledger Account MODVAT credit excise duty deduction