Delhi High Court

70,895 judgments

Year:

Akhil Kumar Saini v. University of Delhi

25 Oct 2016 · Sanjeev Sachdeva, J · 2016:DHC:7197

The Delhi High Court directed the University of Delhi to consider transfer requests of Law Centre-II students to vacant seats in preferred law centres and accepted the University’s assurances to improve academic facilities.

administrative petition_allowed University of Delhi Law Centre-II seat allocation transfer of admission

Akhil Kumar Saini v. University of Delhi

25 Oct 2016 · Sanjeev Sachdeva, J · 2016:DHC:7198

The Delhi High Court directed the University of Delhi to consider student transfer requests from Law Centre-II to preferred Centres if seats become vacant and to address concerns about facilities, ensuring equitable treatment of law students.

administrative petition_allowed University of Delhi Law Centre-II seat allocation student transfer

Patna Water Supply Distribution Networks Private Limited v. Bihar Urban Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited

25 Oct 2016 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:7182

Delhi High Court appointed a three-member arbitral tribunal under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act to resolve disputes between petitioner and BUIDCo, rejecting objections based on jurisdiction, res judicata, and applicability of the Bihar Act.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 petition Appointment of arbitrator Tripartite agreement

Akhil Kumar Saini v. University of Delhi

25 Oct 2016 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:7199

The Delhi High Court disposed of petitions challenging admission to Law Centre-II, directing the University to consider transfers to other law centres based on merit and to address facility concerns.

administrative petition_dismissed seat allocation transfer of students Law Centre-II University of Delhi

Akhil Kumar Saini v. University of Delhi

25 Oct 2016 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:7192

The Delhi High Court directed the University of Delhi to discontinue evening classes for Law Centre-II students, provide library and placement facilities, and consider transfer requests to preferred law centres based on merit and seat availability.

administrative petition_allowed University of Delhi Law Centre-II Campus Law Centre Law Centre-I

Akhil Kumar Saini v. University of Delhi

25 Oct 2016 · Sanjeev Sachdeva, J · 2016:DHC:7191

The Delhi High Court directed the University of Delhi to consider student transfers to preferred law centres if seats become vacant and recorded the University's commitments to improve facilities at Law Centre-II.

administrative petition_allowed University of Delhi Law Centre-II transfer of students educational admissions

Kritika v. Directorate of Education

25 Oct 2016 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:7190

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the mathematics grade assessment of a minor student, holding that subjective academic evaluations are not subject to judicial review under Article 226.

constitutional petition_dismissed academic assessment subjective evaluation Article 226 writ petition

Saomya Saxena v. University of Delhi & Ors.

25 Oct 2016 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:7189

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking relaxation for promotion in the LLB course, holding that the mandatory Promotion Rules requiring clearance of 15 papers cannot be relaxed and past illegal relaxations cannot be perpetuated.

education petition_dismissed Significant Promotion Rules University of Delhi LLB course relaxation

Insecticides (India) Limited v. Raja Pathak & Anr.

25 Oct 2016 · G. S. Sistani · 2016:DHC:7200

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and damages to the plaintiff for trademark and copyright infringement against defendants using a deceptively similar mark, decreeing the suit under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC due to defendants' non-appearance.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement passing off copyright infringement Order 8 Rule 10 CPC

Sweety Gupta v. Neety Gupta & Ors.

25 Oct 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:7166-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld an ex-parte preliminary decree in a partition suit, holding that summons sent by registered post with refusal endorsement create a presumption of service that cannot be rebutted by mere denial without evidence.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant service of summons ex-parte decree Order IX Rule 13 CPC presumption of service

Pushkar Gupta v. Narender Kumar Gupta

25 Oct 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:7165-DB

The Delhi High Court held that refusal to comply with a decree for restitution of conjugal rights does not bar a spouse from obtaining divorce under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, especially when justified by reasonable cause such as wrongful criminal prosecution.

family appeal_dismissed Significant Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 restitution of conjugal rights Section 13(1A)(ii) Section 23(1)(a)

ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd. v. Nirmala & Ors.

25 Oct 2016 · J.R. Midha · 2016:DHC:7203

The Delhi High Court allowed the insurer's appeal to reduce compensation by applying a lower multiplier based on the claimant mother's age and enhanced the interest rate to 9% per annum in a motor accident death claim.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim loss of dependency multiplier future prospects

Magneti Marelli Powertrain India Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

25 Oct 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2016:DHC:7183-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the need to treat technical assistance fees as separate international transactions but ruled that the Transactional Net Margin Method must be consistently applied, remanding the matter for fresh arm's length price determination.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant arm's length price transfer pricing transactional net margin method comparable uncontrolled price method

Jayesh & Anr v. Delhi Development Authority

25 Oct 2016 · Manmohan J · 2016:DHC:7184

The Delhi High Court held that for construction plans involving common areas co-owned by all owners, NOCs from all co-owners are mandatory, directing DDA to decide the petitioners' application accordingly.

property other Significant No Objection Certificate Building Bye-laws 1983 common area co-ownership

Megh Shyam Sharma & Ors. v. Vinod Kumar Sharma

25 Oct 2016 · G. S. Sistani · 2016:DHC:7185

The Delhi High Court allowed the transfer of a possession suit to itself to be heard along with a related declaration and partition suit to avoid conflicting orders and multiplicity of proceedings.

civil appeal_allowed transfer petition Section 24(1)(b)(i) CPC multiplicity of proceedings conflicting orders

Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing (Tianjin) Co Ltd & Ors. v. Anchor Health and Beauty Care Pvt Ltd

25 Oct 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:7168-DB

The Delhi High Court held that an injunction against use of certain trademarks was limited to toothpaste and did not extend to toothbrushes, setting aside the lower court's broader interpretation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement interim injunction oral care products toothpaste

Pink Housing Keeping v. Centre for Development of Telematics

25 Oct 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:7164-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the award of a housekeeping contract, holding that the lowest responsive bid included statutory bonus and the tender process was lawful.

administrative petition_dismissed tender evaluation financial bid responsiveness Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 contract award

Mohini Aggarwal & Anr. v. Deepika Sarees Private Limited & Ors.

25 Oct 2016 · I. S. Mehta · 2016:DHC:7169

The Delhi High Court quashed the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against directors who were not in charge of the company's business at the time of cheque issuance, holding that criminal liability requires actual control and responsibility.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 141 Negotiable Instruments Act Director liability Dishonour of cheque

Vivek Garg v. State

25 Oct 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7170

The Delhi High Court held that a Special Judge cannot direct the CBI to investigate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and upheld dismissal of a complaint alleging election expenditure manipulation by an MLA.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. CBI investigation Election expenditure Representation of People Act, 1951

Sweety Gupta v. Neety Gupta & Ors.

25 Oct 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:7167-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld an ex-parte preliminary decree in a partition suit, holding that summons sent by registered post with postal refusal endorsement creates a presumption of service which the defendant failed to rebut.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant service of summons ex-parte decree Order IX Rule 13 CPC presumption of service