Delhi High Court

71,673 judgments

Year:

JAIPUR MARBLE STONE CORP v. LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF DELHI

19 Jul 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:5031-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings where possession was taken but compensation was unpaid before the 2013 Act are deemed lapsed, directing compensation payment under the 2013 Act without requiring land return.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 land acquisition compensation acquisition proceedings lapsed

Mahender Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

19 Jul 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:5030-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is unpaid for five years, directing payment of compensation despite land utilization.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 land acquisition compensation acquisition proceedings lapse

Dr. Rajesh Aeren v. State of NCT of Delhi

19 Jul 2016 · Vipin Sanghi · 2016:DHC:5064
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Anticipatory bail was refused to the accused in a multi-victim financial fraud case involving complex corporate transactions and diversion of investor funds, as custodial interrogation was deemed necessary for effective investigation.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC financial fraud custodial interrogation

Om Prakash Bawa v. Badri Bhagat Jhandewalan Temple Society

19 Jul 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:5025

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal in a possession suit, holding that cause of action arises from assertion of hostile possession and that mere possession without such assertion is insufficient to claim adverse possession.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant adverse possession cause of action limitation possession suit

Puja Dubey v. Union of India and Ors.

19 Jul 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2016:DHC:5021-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the Army's disciplinary actions following a fatal parasailing accident were grossly inadequate and directed initiation of proportionate disciplinary proceedings, affirming judicial review over penalty proportionality in administrative matters.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Court of Inquiry parasailing accident negligence disciplinary action

Tirupati Busicom Private Limited v. Lucere Lighting Solution Private Limited

19 Jul 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:5033

The Delhi High Court allowed a joint application to dispense with convening meetings of shareholders and creditors for approving a Scheme of Amalgamation where all parties had given written consent.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Section 391(1) Section 394

U C C Care Private Limited v. UCC Crafts Private Limited

19 Jul 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:5032

The Delhi High Court allowed the application to dispense with convening meetings of shareholders and creditors for approval of a Scheme of Arrangement between two companies, based on majority written consents and absence of pending proceedings.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Arrangement Companies Act, 1956 dispensing with meetings shareholders consent

M/S KISHOO FARMS v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

19 Jul 2016 · BADAR DURREZ AHMED; ASHUTOSH KUMAR · 2016:DHC:5063-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings without timely compensation lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, but compensation must be paid if the land has been utilized.

property petition_allowed Significant land acquisition Section 24(2) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 compensation

Gulshan Sahni v. Faquir Chand Sahni

19 Jul 2016 · Jayant Nath · 2016:DHC:5071

The High Court upheld the trial court's order allowing leave to defend based on counsel's binding concession and dismissed the petition challenging the same due to delay and sanctity of court concessions.

civil petition_dismissed Significant counsel's concession leave to defend Delhi Rent Control Act review petition

Satish Sharma v. Dinesh Dhiman

19 Jul 2016 · Jayant Nath · 2016:DHC:5072

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order allowing amendment of the plaint to include damages arising from the same cause of action, emphasizing that such amendments are permissible at the initial stage to avoid multiplicity of litigation.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order VI Rule 17 CPC amendment of pleadings cause of action multiplicity of litigation

Amina Bharatram v. Sumant Bharatram and Ors.

19 Jul 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:5022-DB

The Delhi High Court's original civil jurisdiction in family law matters enumerated under Sections 7 and 8 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is ousted where a Family Court is established, as the High Court is deemed a 'District Court' for such jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Family Courts Act, 1984 original civil jurisdiction District Court High Court

RATIONAL ENTERPRISES ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Shiv Khorana, Adv. v. BALKRISHNA INDUSTRIES LTD .....

19 Jul 2016 · HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J. (ORAL); Part... · 2016:DHC:5073

The Delhi High Court held that the decretal amount includes principal, interest, and costs, and directed the respondent to deposit the full amount with additional costs before proceeding with the leave to defend application.

civil petition_allowed Significant decree decretal amount interest costs

Parwana Co-Op Group Housing Society Ltd. v. Registrar Cooperative Societies

19 Jul 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2016:DHC:5023-DB

The provided text is an index page referencing a judgment dated 19.07.2016 in W.P.(C) 253-257/2004 without substantive content for analysis.

other other

Canopy Nirmans Private Limited v. Terra Realcon Private Limited

19 Jul 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:5051

The Delhi High Court allowed the application to dispense with convening meetings of shareholders and creditors for sanctioning a Scheme of Amalgamation where all parties consented in writing and no secured creditors or pending proceedings existed.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 and 394 dispensing meetings

Allied Trademart Private Limited & Ors. v. JMR Buildwell Private Limited

19 Jul 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:5050

The Delhi High Court sanctioned a Scheme of Amalgamation under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, allowing dissolution of transferor companies without winding up upon compliance with statutory requirements.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 and 394 transferor companies

Surinder Pal Singh v. Ved Prakash Deceased through his LRs

19 Jul 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:5016

The Delhi High Court held that limitation for a suit for specific performance begins from the date of refusal to perform, not the date fixed for performance, and remanded the suit for trial instead of dismissing it at the preliminary stage.

civil appeal_allowed Significant specific performance limitation Article 54 Limitation Act agreement to sell

R.P. Sharma v. Registrar Cooperative Societies

19 Jul 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2016:DHC:5024-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that an Administrator appointed during supersession cannot validly enroll new members in a cooperative society, rendering such memberships and related arbitration awards void, and dismissed the petitioners' claim to flats based on such invalid membership.

property appeal_dismissed Significant cooperative society membership administrator authority Delhi Cooperative Societies Act 1972 enrollment of members

Gurmeet Singh Bawa v. Mrs. Gurcharan Kaur & Ors.

19 Jul 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:5018

The Delhi High Court upheld dismissal of a possession suit where the appellant failed to prove termination of contractual tenancy, holding that tenancy rights devolve on all legal heirs under general succession law absent termination.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant contractual tenancy statutory tenancy Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 termination of tenancy

Sh. Luice M. Jacob v. Union of India & Ors.

19 Jul 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:5020

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal, upholding that the appellant failed to prove ownership by adverse possession over the Armenian Cemetery property allotted to the Armenian Association by the Government.

civil appeal_dismissed adverse possession hostile possession animus possidendi ownership

S P Garg v. State

19 Jul 2016 · S.P. Garg · 2016:DHC:5019

The High Court allowed the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. setting aside the trial court's order that denied the accused the right to cross-examine the complainant in pre-charge evidence, emphasizing the right to a fair trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. pre-charge evidence right to cross-examine miscarriage of justice