Delhi High Court

71,157 judgments

Year:

Chandra Prabhu Marketing Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v. Lt. Governor & Ors.

27 Sep 2016 · Manmohan · 2016:DHC:6755

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of the 15th March 2000 cut-off date for allotting alternative plots to paper merchants under the relocation scheme and dismissed the petition seeking its extension.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant cut-off date paper merchants relocation scheme alternative plots

Krishan Dutt Sharma v. State

27 Sep 2016 · A. K. Pathak · 2016:DHC:8687

The Delhi High Court granted bail to petitioners in a criminal case following an amicable settlement reached through mediation, subject to furnishing personal bonds and sureties.

criminal bail_granted bail settlement mediation conciliation

Mohan Madan v. Sheel Gulati

26 Sep 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:6703-DB

The Delhi High Court remanded a property sale dispute for examination of key witnesses as court witnesses under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC to resolve the authenticity of earnest money payment and disputed document writings.

civil remanded Significant Order 41 Rule 27 CPC additional evidence earnest money bayana receipt

Nitish Kumar @ Nitin v. State (NCT of Delhi)

26 Sep 2016 · A.K. Pathak · 2016:DHC:8686

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners accused of sexual misconduct, considering delay in FIR and no need for custodial interrogation.

criminal appeal_allowed anticipatory bail sexual misconduct allegations custodial interrogation delay in FIR

Bhagirath Verma v. Rajesh Solanki; Sanjay Singh

26 Sep 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:6738

The Delhi Rent Control Act does not apply to tenanted premises in Palam village absent a government notification, allowing the landlord society to validly sue for possession and terminate tenancy.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 1(2) notification possession suit tenant protection

HBO India Private Limited v. Regional Director, Northern Region

26 Sep 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:6750-DB

The Delhi High Court approved HBO India Private Limited's petition for reduction of share capital under the Companies Act, condoning procedural delays and dispensing with certain formalities in absence of creditor objections.

corporate petition_allowed reduction of share capital Companies Act 1956 Companies Act 2013 Court approval

Saroj & Ors. v. Balbir Singh

26 Sep 2016 · Jayant Nath, J. · 2016:DHC:6751

The Delhi High Court upheld an eviction order on bona fide requirement grounds, dismissing tenant's leave to defend application due to lack of triable issues and rejecting challenges to adoption and alleged conversion of shop into a gate.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) bona fide requirement eviction

Meena @ Nirmala v. State

26 Sep 2016 · S.P. Garg · 2016:DHC:6736

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant in a trafficking and prostitution case due to unreliable sole testimony and lack of corroborative evidence, granting her benefit of doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant sole testimony prosecutrix benefit of doubt Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act

Naresh Kumar v. Ravinder Kumar

26 Sep 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:6735

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's appeal and applications for restoration and condonation of delay, upholding the decree for recovery of a Rs. 2 lakh loan due to failure to prove repayment and insufficient cause for delay.

civil appeal_dismissed loan recovery proof of repayment Punjab Registration of Money-Lender’s Act, 1938 condonation of delay

Nitin Bhatia v. Nidhi Kalani

26 Sep 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:6734-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Family Court’s interim maintenance order, affirming that reasonable estimation of income based on bank deposits and social status is permissible under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

family appeal_dismissed Significant interim maintenance Section 24 Hindu Marriage Act income computation maintenance pendente lite

Union of India v. M/s Jayaswals Neco Ltd

26 Sep 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:6737-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitration award and clarified that post-decree payments must be appropriated first towards interest as per the decree, rejecting the Railways' unilateral appropriation claims and dismissing their appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration award appropriation of payments interest on interest Indian Contract Act Sections 59 to 61

North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Amrit Mehta & Ors.

26 Sep 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:6733

The Delhi High Court held that non-use of dilapidated premises does not constitute abandonment of tenancy, set aside the appellate court's finding of abandonment, and dismissed the suit for permanent injunction against the municipal corporation tenant.

civil appeal_allowed Significant abandonment of tenancy dilapidated premises Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 permanent injunction

ICICI Bank Ltd v. Lokesh Gautam

26 Sep 2016 · JAYANT NATH · 2016:DHC:6744

The Delhi High Court held that courts must pragmatically exercise their power under Order 40 Rule 1 CPC to appoint a Receiver ex parte in bank recovery suits to protect secured assets and public funds.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 40 Rule 1 CPC appointment of Receiver vehicle loan recovery ex parte order

ICICI Bank Ltd v. Kamal Kumar

26 Sep 2016 · JAYANT NATH · 2016:DHC:6747

The Delhi High Court held that courts should pragmatically appoint ex parte receivers in bank recovery suits under Order 40 Rule 1 CPC to protect secured assets and public funds, setting aside the trial court’s refusal to do so.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 40 Rule 1 CPC appointment of receiver vehicle loan recovery ex parte receiver

ICICI Bank Ltd v. Kailash Chand

26 Sep 2016 · JAYANT NATH · 2016:DHC:6745

Delhi High Court allowed ICICI Bank's appeal directing appointment of an ex parte Receiver to take possession of a vehicle securing a defaulted loan, emphasizing pragmatic protection of public funds under Order 40 Rule 1 CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 40 Rule 1 CPC appointment of Receiver vehicle loan recovery ex parte order

DELHI TRANSCO LIMITED v. SHRI KANHIYA LAL

26 Sep 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:6739

The Delhi High Court held that a duly served termination order following a fair departmental enquiry is final and cannot be challenged after the limitation period, setting aside lower courts' judgments reinstating the employee.

civil appeal_allowed Significant termination order departmental enquiry natural justice service of notice

Satish v. Om Bati

26 Sep 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:6740

The Delhi High Court upheld the ownership of the suit property in favor of the respondent, holding that valid adoption does not confer title without proof of ancestral property, and a licensee can be evicted by mandatory injunction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant adoption validity Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 Hindu Succession Act, 1956 ancestral property

M/S. GURUKUL BOOKS & PACKAGING & ANR. v. M/S. EVERGREEN PUBLICATIONS (INDIA) & ANR.

26 Sep 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:6741

The Delhi High Court set aside an interim injunction in a copyright suit over ICSE examination papers, directing the trial court to reconsider the injunction application with proper reasoning and ordered appellants to maintain sales accounts pending decision.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant copyright infringement examination question papers interim injunction fair use

Subhash Arora v. Kalvinder Singh Sandhu & Ors.

26 Sep 2016 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:6742

The Delhi High Court granted specific performance of an Agreement to Sell, disregarding a collusive subsequent sale deed, directing defendants to execute the sale deed in favor of the plaintiff upon payment of balance consideration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance agreement to sell collusive sale deed sham document

Rajender @ Kallu v. State; Rajesh v. State

26 Sep 2016 · Gita Mittal; P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:6748-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeals of Rajender @ Kallu and Rajesh, upholding their convictions and life sentences for murder and robbery based on credible eyewitness testimony and corroborative forensic evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 302 IPC Section 392 IPC Eyewitness testimony Recovery of weapon