Delhi High Court

71,423 judgments

Year:

Mohd. Sabir @ Sonu & Anr. v. State

23 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:4180

The Delhi High Court modified convictions from dacoity to robbery due to insufficient number of accused, acquitted one appellant for lack of evidence, and upheld others’ convictions based on recoveries and victim’s court identification despite TIP failures.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dacoity robbery identification parade recovery of stolen property

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private Limited v. Union of India

23 May 2016 · Manmohan · 2016:DHC:4181

The Delhi High Court set aside licence cancellation orders for Benzocaine condoms due to lack of prior hearing and directed fresh consideration after opportunity of hearing.

administrative appeal_allowed licence cancellation natural justice show cause notice opportunity of hearing

Dr. Nitin Johar & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr.

23 May 2016 · Manmohan · 2016:DHC:4182

The Delhi High Court directed the Medical Council of India to complete recognition of post-graduate medical degrees within a fixed timeframe, holding that students admitted in accordance with law should not be denied degrees due to institutional non-compliance.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Medical Council of India post-graduate medical degrees recognition of medical courses fundamental rights

Ravinder Kumar @ Sadhu v. State

23 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:4172

The High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC while setting aside other convictions due to lack of credible evidence, emphasizing the primacy of medical and forensic proof over contradictory witness statements.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 307 IPC attempt to murder kidnapping wrongful confinement

ITE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. DELHI TOURISM AND TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED

23 May 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:4175-DB

The Delhi High Court held that an unconditional acceptance of an offer to extend a contract creates a binding agreement which cannot be unilaterally withdrawn, granting interim relief to the appellant against the respondent's attempt to revoke the extension.

civil appeal_allowed Significant contract extension offer and acceptance unilateral withdrawal of offer Section 9 Arbitration Act

SOM PROJECTS PVT LTD v. RITES LIMITED

23 May 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:4174-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the recall of a tender due to ambiguity in credit item quoting, dismissing the petitioner's claim to contract award based on flawed financial bid evaluation.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant tender recall e-tender financial bid evaluation credit item

Sanjay Aggarwal and Ors. v. Parkash and Ors.

20 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4166

The Delhi High Court upheld 50% contributory negligence against the claimant driver but ordered full compensation to other injured third parties and enhanced the death claim compensation applying correct legal principles.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim contributory negligence compensation loss of dependency

Vinod Kumar & Anr v. Ajay Kumar Singhal

20 May 2016 · Indermeet Kaur, J. · 2016:DHC:4157

The Delhi High Court set aside an eviction decree under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, holding that the landlord failed to prove bonafide need and absence of alternate accommodation, with fabricated evidence undermining the eviction claim.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act Section 14(1)(e) bonafide need landlord-tenant relationship

The New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Farida & Ors.

20 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4156

The Delhi High Court held that under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, an insurer cannot deny compensation on the ground that the deceased driver lacked a valid driving license, affirming no-fault liability principles.

motor_accident_claims appeal_dismissed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 163-A no-fault liability insurance policy breach

Desh Raj Singh Gautam v. Sunil Kumar and Ors.

20 May 2016 · R.K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4159

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation for loss of future income in a motor accident claim by correctly applying the multiplier method for post-retirement disability loss.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim loss of future income functional disability multiplier method

Reliance General Ins Co Ltd v. Shobha Rana & Ors.

20 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4160

The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurer's appeal, upholding the tribunal's finding of negligence and the award of compensation with future prospects to the deceased's dependents.

civil appeal_dismissed motor accident claim negligence eyewitness testimony future prospects

Dileep Wangoo & Anr. v. Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority & Anr.

20 May 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:4170

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging IIISLA's election process, holding that non-members lack locus to contest internal elections and that membership admission procedures must be followed.

administrative petition_dismissed IIISLA IRDA Insurance Act Section 64 UM

Virender Kumar Sikka (Deceased) v. Juginder Arora

20 May 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:4171

The Delhi High Court upheld the decree of ejectment against the legal heirs of a deceased tenant, holding that oral tenancy terminable by notice was validly terminated and security deposit claims do not bar ejectment.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant ejectment decree on admissions oral tenancy security deposit

Mukesh Kumar & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

20 May 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:4167-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003 on the ground of amicable settlement and payment of dues, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and Article 226 of the Constitution.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 135 Indian Electricity Act Section 482 Cr.P.C. Article 226 Constitution

Santosh Kumar Lobaniya v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

20 May 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:4169-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406 and 498A IPC arising from matrimonial discord following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC and Article 226.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC Article 226 Constitution matrimonial dispute

Rahul Batra & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

20 May 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:4168-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406, 498A, and 34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC matrimonial dispute divorce by mutual consent

Vicky @ Vikas v. State

20 May 2016 · S.P. Garg · 2016:DHC:4161

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and sentences of two appellants for robbery with dangerous injuries, rejecting their appeal and application for concurrent sentences.

criminal appeal_dismissed robbery identification Test Identification Parade victim testimony

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL v. NARENDER SINGH

20 May 2016 · R.K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4162
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld contributory negligence of both drivers in a fatal accident, enhanced compensation including transport allowance and future prospects, and increased interest rate on the award.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim negligence FIR contributory negligence

Rajpal @ Hathi @ Sonu v. State

20 May 2016 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:4149

The Delhi High Court modified the appellant's conviction from kidnapping and robbery with a deadly weapon to kidnapping and theft with force, acquitting him of robbery due to lack of evidence of threat with a weapon.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 365 IPC Section 397 IPC Section 392 IPC kidnapping

Shaheed v. State

20 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:4150

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant of culpable homicide under Section 304-II IPC due to failure of the prosecution to conclusively prove his identity as the assailant, emphasizing the benefit of doubt in criminal law.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 304-II IPC benefit of doubt eyewitness testimony site plan