Delhi High Court

69,037 judgments

Year:

Phool Singh v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

27 Oct 2016 · Indermeet Kaur · 2016:DHC:7235

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking residential use of land designated as a park, holding that adverse possession cannot be claimed as title amid pending litigation and land use cannot be altered contrary to the approved development plan.

property petition_dismissed Significant adverse possession land use development plan Delhi Development Act

Vineet Kumar Tyagi v. Bhagat Singh Chauhan

27 Oct 2016 · S. P. Garg · 2016:DHC:7227

The High Court upheld the Trial Court's order allowing cross-examination of the complainant under Section 145(2) Negotiable Instruments Act despite poor drafting, emphasizing the right to cross-examination when material facts are in dispute.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 145(2) Negotiable Instruments Act Section 482 Cr.P.C. cross-examination right to cross-examine

The Singer Company v. Mohammed Fayaz

27 Oct 2016 · G. S. Sistani · 2016:DHC:7246

The Delhi High Court held that the defendant's use of the mark "MERRITT STAR" infringed the plaintiffs' registered trademark "MERRITT" and constituted passing off, granting permanent injunction in favor of the plaintiffs.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Passing off Trade Marks Act 1999 Section 29(2)

M/S. D.P. BAGS (P) LTD. v. M/S. NAV BHARAT INTERNATIONAL LTD.

27 Oct 2016 · R.K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:7247

The Delhi High Court held that a suit for recovery against a sick industrial company can proceed despite a pending BIFR reference if the claim is disputed and not included in any rehabilitation scheme under SICA.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 22(1) SICA sick industrial company Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction suit for recovery

Shrj Salek Chand Jain v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

26 Oct 2016 · The Chief Justice; Ms. Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2016:DHC:8666-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking directions to control bird flu, holding that the government had already taken adequate and prompt measures.

administrative petition_dismissed Public Interest Litigation bird flu avian influenza government response

BABITA v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

26 Oct 2016 · Sanjiv Khanna; Sunita Gupta · 2016:DHC:8667-DB

The Delhi High Court held that administrative guidelines cannot override statutory provisions and directed authorities to consider relaxation of teacher qualification requirements under Section 23(2) of the RTE Act, 2009.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 Section 23(2) CTET TET

Muneeb Ahmad v. State (GNCT of Delhi)

26 Oct 2016 · A. K. Pathak · 2016:DHC:8729

The Delhi High Court restored anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a sexual assault case after finding the subsequent FIR to be a counterblast and the cancellation of bail unjustified.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail Section 376 IPC counterblast FIR false implication

Ansfiumalee Sood v. Sudershana Kumariblegan

26 Oct 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:8544 J

The High Court set aside the order directing framing of additional issues and remanded the appeals for fresh adjudication based on existing evidence without framing new issues.

civil appeal_allowed framing of issues mesne profits first appellate court appeal

Union of India v. Supl\J Infrastructures Pvt Ltd

26 Oct 2016 · S. Muralidhar · 2016:DHC:9360

The High Court dismissed the petitions filed by the Union of India for non-prosecution due to failure to appear and prosecute.

other petition_dismissed non-prosecution dismissal petition failure to appear

Shakti Pershad v. M/S Assotech Ltd

26 Oct 2016 · S. Muralidhar · 2016:DHC:8328

The Delhi High Court disposed of arbitration petitions after parties settled their dispute through a binding Settlement Agreement executed via court mediation and compliance with its terms.

civil appeal_allowed Arbitration Settlement Agreement Mediation Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre

BSES Rajdhani Power Limited v. Sh. Chand Singh

26 Oct 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:7206

The Delhi High Court allowed the appellant's appeal, holding that implied consent and estoppel prevent the landowner from seeking removal of a long-standing electricity sub-station installed with permanent works under a license that cannot be revoked.

civil appeal_allowed Significant license irrevocability Indian Easements Act Section 60(b) estoppel Indian Evidence Act Section 115

Dinesh Kumar Gupta v. Union of India & Ors.

26 Oct 2016 · Sanjiv Khanna; Sunita Gupta · 2016:DHC:7210-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the rejection of a voluntary retirement request under Rule 48A, holding that non-communication before the notice expiry does not amount to deemed acceptance if the competent authority had already rejected the request.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant voluntary retirement Rule 48A Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 deemed acceptance

M/S ICICI BANK LTD v. PRAVEEN MAHESHWARI

26 Oct 2016 · Hima Kohli · 2016:DHC:7215

The Delhi High Court disposed of the appeal by recording a voluntary Settlement Agreement between the parties, binding them to its terms and leaving them to bear their own costs.

civil appeal_allowed Settlement Agreement Mediation and Conciliation Voluntary Settlement Enforceability of Settlement

Ranchem Private Limited v. RWL Healthworld Limited v. RHC Holding Private Limited

26 Oct 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:7214-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed a first motion application under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, dispensing with certain meetings due to unanimous consent and directing convening of others with procedural safeguards for a Scheme of Arrangement involving amalgamation and demerger.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Arrangement Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394 amalgamation

Su Estates Pvt Ltd v. Ireo Pvt Ltd

26 Oct 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:7213-DB

The Delhi High Court sanctioned a Composite Scheme of Arrangement involving amalgamation and de-merger under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, dispensing with meetings due to unanimous written consents from all stakeholders.

corporate appeal_allowed Composite Scheme of Arrangement Amalgamation De-merger Companies Act 1956

United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Smi Fateh Alam and Ors.

26 Oct 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:7216

The Delhi High Court upheld a motor accident compensation award against the insurer, affirming that negligence can be established on circumstantial evidence by preponderance of probability in civil claims.

civil appeal_dismissed motor accident claim negligence circumstantial evidence standard of proof

Ratul Puri v. State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

26 Oct 2016 · Hima Kohli · 2016:DHC:7211

The Delhi High Court directed the Bank to consider the petitioner’s representation against inclusion as a Wilful Defaulter with a personal hearing and restrained public disclosure pending challenge, criticizing the Bank’s issuance of multiple notices in different capacities.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Wilful Defaulter Identification Committee Natural Justice Representation

COL M L Kaktikar (Retd.) and Anr. v. New Delhi Municipal Council and Ors.

26 Oct 2016 · Hima Kohli · 2016:DHC:7212

The Delhi High Court directed NDMC to inspect alleged unauthorized construction not covered by pending appeals and take appropriate action following due process, disposing of the writ petition accordingly.

administrative petition_dismissed unauthorized construction municipal authority show cause notice building regulations

Super Cassettes Industries Pvt Ltd v. Haridwar Cables Network

26 Oct 2016 · G.S. Sistani · 2016:DHC:7218
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that unauthorized cable broadcast of copyrighted works constitutes infringement and awarded permanent injunction along with punitive damages against the defaulting cable operator.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant copyright infringement cable operator communication to the public punitive damages

Super Cassettes Industries Pvt Ltd v. SBN Network

26 Oct 2016 · G.S. Sistani · 2016:DHC:7220
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that unauthorized cable broadcasting of copyrighted works without a license constitutes infringement and awarded permanent injunction along with compensatory and punitive damages against the defendant.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant copyright infringement communication to the public cable television sound recordings