Delhi High Court

71,673 judgments

Year:

Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd v. Shalu Sharma & Ors.

24 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4293

The Delhi High Court upheld the tribunal's award of compensation including future prospects in a motor accident claim where evidence showed progressive income increase.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 loss of dependency future prospects income tax returns

Jasbir Singh v. Mange Ram

24 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4292

The Delhi High Court upheld the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s finding of negligence against the bus driver and owner, dismissing their appeals and confirming compensation awards to the injured and deceased’s dependents.

civil appeal_dismissed motor vehicular accident negligence compensation Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

HLPL Global Logistics Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (General)

24 May 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:4264-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that failure to issue a Show Cause Notice within the mandatory ninety-day period under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations 2013 invalidates suspension orders of a Customs Broker’s licence.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations 2013 Show Cause Notice Suspension of licence Regulation 19(1)

Vasan Health Care Pvt Ltd v. GE Capital Services India

24 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:4252-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the secured creditor's right to possession of hypothecated machinery upon borrower's default, initially permitting joint receivership but ultimately reinstating sole receivership due to borrower's non-cooperation and disappearance of collateral.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant hypothecated machinery receiver cross-default clause Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Vasan Health Care Pvt Ltd v. GE Capital Services India

24 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:4246-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the appointment of a sole receiver over hypothecated medical equipment due to borrower's non-cooperation and unauthorized removal of assets, emphasizing protection of lender's security under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 receiver appointment hypothecated machinery cross-default clause

Vasan Health Care Pvt Ltd v. GE Capital Services India

24 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:4247-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the secured creditor's right to possession of hypothecated machinery upon borrower default, emphasizing cooperation in receivership arrangements and reinstating sole receivership due to borrower's non-cooperation.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cross-default clause hypothecated machinery receivership

PRADEEP v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

24 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:4239

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for sexually assaulting an 8-year-old girl, relying on credible victim testimony corroborated by forensic evidence despite minor procedural lapses and inconclusive DNA linkage.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant rape child sexual assault forensic evidence DNA report

Beerbali v. State

24 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:4240

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant in a rape case due to material contradictions in the victim's testimony and inconclusive DNA evidence, emphasizing the necessity of conclusive proof beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant rape victim testimony contradictions in evidence partial DNA profiling

Vasan Health Care Pvt Ltd v. GE Capital Services India

24 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:4241-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the appointment of a sole receiver over hypothecated medical equipment after borrower’s non-cooperation frustrated a prior joint receivership arrangement under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act hypothecated property receiver appointment cross-default clause

Vasan Health Care Pvt Ltd v. GE Capital Services India

24 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:4242-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the appointment of a sole receiver over hypothecated medical equipment after the borrower frustrated a joint receivership arrangement by non-cooperation and removal of collateral, affirming the lender's right to protect its security under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 interim relief receiver appointment hypothecated machinery

Vasan Health Care Pvt Ltd v. GE Capital Services India

24 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:4243-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the appointment of a sole receiver over hypothecated medical equipment due to Vasan's default and non-cooperation, dismissing its appeal against interim orders under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 receiver appointment hypothecated property cross-default clause

Vasan Health Care Pvt Ltd v. GE Capital Services India

24 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:4244-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the appointment of a sole receiver over hypothecated medical equipment due to borrower’s default and non-cooperation, emphasizing protection of secured creditor’s rights under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 receiver appointment hypothecated machinery cross-default clause

Bandhu Systematix Private Limited v. Registrar of Companies

24 May 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:4477

The Delhi High Court allowed restoration of a company’s name struck off without proper notice under Section 560 of the Companies Act, 1956, subject to compliance with outstanding statutory filings and payment of costs.

corporate petition_allowed Significant Companies Act 1956 Section 560 restoration of company name strike off

Roshan Lal Lalit Mohan v. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi

23 May 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru

The Delhi High Court set aside the rejection of a VAT refund and related default assessment orders due to departmental failure to comply with statutory time limits and destruction of records, directing refund with interest.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 refund claim Section 38 DVAT Act default assessment

Indu Bala v. Krishna Kumar Gupta and Anr

23 May 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:8598

The Delhi High Court dismissed a partition suit for lack of specific property description, ownership particulars, and non-compliance with the Benami Act, allowing withdrawal to file a fresh suit after rectification.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant partition suit cause of action Order 7 Rule 3 CPC Order 6 Rule 4 CPC

M/S Shakuntala Properties Pvt Ltd v. Vijaypal & Ors.

23 May 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:8460

The Delhi High Court allowed a joint application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC and decreed a suit for specific performance based on a compromise between the parties regarding sale of property subject to obtaining a lease deed from DDA.

civil appeal_allowed specific performance Order 23 Rule 3 CPC compromise joint application

Ansamma Sabu & Ancy Sabu v. Ravi Kumar Rana and Ors.

23 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4212

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation for permanent disability and pain and suffering in a motor accident claim by aligning loss of future income with medical disability evidence and directed protective deposit of the enhanced amount.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim permanent disability loss of future income compensation

SH VIJAY SINGH & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

23 May 2016 · Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:4207

The Delhi High Court condoned a 1433-day delay in filing a land acquisition appeal by rural appellants, applying a justice-oriented approach and directing compensation enhancement per the Supreme Court ruling while denying interest for the delay period.

property appeal_allowed Significant condonation of delay land acquisition compensation enhancement sufficient cause

State of Haryana & Anr. v. Mohd. Kalia & Ors.

23 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4216

The Delhi High Court upheld the tribunal's finding of negligence against the bus driver and affirmed the compensation awarded to the injured motorcyclists under the Motor Vehicles Act.

motor_vehicles_accident_compensation appeal_dismissed motor vehicle accident negligence compensation Motor Vehicles Act 1988

Kirti & Anr v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

23 May 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:4236-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed a FIR involving private offences under IPC on the ground of amicable settlement between neighbors, applying Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 Cr.P.C. amicable settlement private offences