Delhi High Court

71,673 judgments

Year:

Himanshi v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

20 Jul 2016 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:5082

The Delhi High Court held that an ST certificate issued by a competent revenue authority outside Delhi cannot be rejected solely on that ground for admission under the Disadvantaged Group category and directed admission of the petitioner accordingly.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Disadvantaged Group category Scheduled Tribe certificate Admission to nursery class Delhi Education Act, 1973

Veena Rani v. Renu Kapoor

20 Jul 2016 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:5086

The Delhi High Court held that a complaint under Section 138 NI Act cannot be quashed at the pre-trial stage based on disputed evidence and that detailed appreciation of evidence is for the trial court.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 482 CrPC quashing of complaint statutory notice

Anil Bhatia v. State & Anr.

20 Jul 2016 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:5088

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash an FIR under Section 420 IPC, holding that the allegations disclosed a prima facie case of cheating and the FIR was rightly registered.

criminal petition_dismissed quashing of FIR Section 420 IPC Section 156(3) CrPC cheating

Raj Kumar v. Suraj Bhan & Ors.

20 Jul 2016 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:5083

The High Court upheld the trial court's refusal to summon certain accused due to lack of material evidence implicating them in alleged offences of fraud and forgery related to property partition.

criminal petition_dismissed summoning Section 420 IPC Section 468 IPC Section 471 IPC

Overseas Air Cargo Services v. Commissioner of Customs (General)

20 Jul 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Najmi Waziri · 2016:DHC:5087-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that non-compliance with mandatory time limits under Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations renders revocation of CHA license legally unsustainable and set aside the revocation order.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Customs House Agent license revocation Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations 2004 Customs Broker Licensing Regulations 2013

Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board v. Praveen Kumar

20 Jul 2016 · G. S. Sistani; I. S. Mehta · 2016:DHC:5096-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order granting age relaxation to a candidate with a diploma in Education recognized as equivalent to the ETE course for recruitment as Teacher (Primary) in MCD, emphasizing equal treatment under Articles 14 and 16.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant age relaxation equivalence of qualifications ETE course diploma in Education

M/S.M.S.SHOES EAST LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

20 Jul 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Najmi Waziri · 2016:DHC:5085-DB

The Delhi High Court held that an unsigned draft order cannot be treated as a valid final order under the Customs Act, directing fresh adjudication of the petitioner's revision application.

administrative other Significant Customs Act, 1962 Section 129DD adjudicating authority draft order

Nanki Fashions v. Commissioner of Customs (Exports)

20 Jul 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Najmi Waziri · 2016:DHC:5084-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Customs authority to refund Rs. 10 lakhs deposited pending appeal along with interest within a stipulated time after the petitioner succeeded before CESTAT.

administrative petition_allowed refund CESTAT Customs deposit pending appeal

Vijay Kumar Sharma v. Manoj Kumar Garg

20 Jul 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:5089

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal upholding the arrears of rent decree and clarified that prior permission under the Slum Act is required only for eviction of lawful tenants, not unauthorized occupants.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 Section 19 Slum Act Order II Rule 2 CPC Section 100 CPC

Ravi Sahni v. Pomesh Sahni

20 Jul 2016 · Jayant Nath · 2016:DHC:5102

The Delhi High Court held that a suit for recovery of a loan repayable on demand is governed by Article 22 of the Limitation Act and the plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC merely on limitation grounds without evidence.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC Limitation Act 1963 Article 19 Limitation Act Article 22 Limitation Act

M/S METAL ENGINEERING & TREATMENT CO PVT LTD v. MANISH KUMAR AGGARWAL

20 Jul 2016 · JAYANT NATH, J. · 2016:DHC:5101

The Delhi High Court held that the Delhi courts have exclusive territorial jurisdiction to try the suit based on contract formation, payments made in Delhi, and an exclusive jurisdiction clause in the contract.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction cause of action contract formation payment location

Vidur Impex and Traders Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v. Poonam Khanna and Ors.

20 Jul 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2016:DHC:5104-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld a compromise decree under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC, rejecting claims of fraud and holding that clandestine transactions violating injunction orders do not entitle parties to impleadment or invalidate the decree.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant compromise decree Order 23 Rule 3 CPC fraud on court impleadment

Shiv Karan Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

20 Jul 2016 · G.S. Sistani; I.S. Mehta · 2016:DHC:5098-DB

The Delhi High Court modified a dismissal penalty to compulsory retirement for a police constable absent on medical grounds, holding that punishment must be proportionate and medical certificates cannot be disbelieved without valid reasons.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant disciplinary inquiry proportionality of punishment medical certificate dismissal from service

Prakash Industries Ltd v. Manmohan Bansal & Ors.

20 Jul 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:5099

Delhi High Court held it has territorial jurisdiction over trademark infringement suit based on defendants' marketing in Delhi and confirmed interim injunction against use of deceptively similar mark.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction trademark infringement passing off interim injunction

Sardar Jarnail Singh & Anr v. Sardar Amarjit Singh & Ors

20 Jul 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:5097

The Delhi High Court held that a suit for partition of a property acquired by sale deeds is maintainable even if other jointly inherited properties held with others are excluded, rejecting the plea of partial partition.

civil appeal_allowed Significant partition suit partial partition joint family property coparcenary property

Puran Chand Arya v. Union of India & Ors.

20 Jul 2016 · Chief Justice; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal; G. Rohini · 2016:DHC:5103-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking statutory definitions and equal benefits for Armed Forces personnel designated as 'Sainik', 'Soldier', 'Fouji', or 'Jawan' due to vagueness and lack of statutory basis.

constitutional petition_dismissed Sainik Soldier Fouji Jawan

Sushil Prajapati & Anr v. State (Govt of NCT)

20 Jul 2016 · Vipin Sanghi · 2016:DHC:8266

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners accused of arranging loans on forged documents, holding they were not obliged to verify document authenticity and had cooperated with investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed anticipatory bail Section 438 Cr.P.C. forgery fabrication of documents

Sisodia v. State (NCT of Delhi)

20 Jul 2016 · P-S Uttam Nagar; A.K. Pathak · 2016:DHC:8285

The Delhi High Court dismissed anticipatory bail applications in a road rage assault case, holding that pending identification and production of vehicles do not entitle accused persons to bail.

criminal appeal_dismissed anticipatory bail road rage Test Identification Parade identification

Abneringty Watre v. The University of Delhi & Ors

20 Jul 2016 · The Chief Justice; Ms. Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2016:DHC:8434-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the refusal to direct Delhi University to provide photocopies of answer scripts at Rs. 2 per page, holding that the matter was pending before other forums and the petitioner could seek relief in those proceedings.

administrative appeal_dismissed Right to Information Act, 2005 photocopies of answer scripts condonation of delay Section 5 Limitation Act

Jindal Stainless Steelway Ltd v. Shanti Industries

20 Jul 2016 · A.K. Pathak · 2016:DHC:8508

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal against dismissal of a cheque dishonour complaint for non-prosecution, holding that the complainant had complied with court orders and condoned delay caused by pursuing the wrong legal remedy.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 Section 142 non-prosecution