Delhi High Court

71,423 judgments

Year:

Amitabh Kumar Shahi & Anr. v. The State Govt of NCT Delhi & Ors

18 May 2016 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2016:DHC:4055-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed a habeas corpus petition directing that a married minor girl be permitted to reside with her husband, recognizing the husband as her natural guardian and prioritizing her welfare and choice.

family petition_allowed Significant custody of married minor girl natural guardian Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 welfare of minor

Formosa Plastics Corporation USA v. Ashok Chauhan & Ors.

18 May 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2016:DHC:4056-DB

The Delhi High Court held that dismissal of an execution petition not set down for final hearing is improper under Order XXI Rule 105 CPC, a judge cannot assume jurisdiction over part-heard matters outside the roster, and applications to recall such orders are maintainable under Section 151 CPC, allowing the appeal and remanding for fresh consideration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant execution petition Order XXI Rule 105 CPC Order XXI Rule 106 CPC Section 151 CPC

Formosa Plastics Corporation USA v. Ashok Chauhan & Ors.

18 May 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2016:DHC:4057-DB

Judgment pronouncing the decision in a civil commercial dispute between Formosa Plastics Corporation USA and Ashok Chauhan & Ors. in the Delhi High Court.

civil other Formosa Plastics Corporation commercial dispute Delhi High Court civil litigation

Vikas Kumar v. State

18 May 2016 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:4034

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant of kidnapping and enticement charges under Sections 363 and 366 IPC, holding that the minor prosecutrix voluntarily accompanied him without inducement or moral persuasion.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant kidnapping enticement minor lawful guardian

Indu Lata Rangwala v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

18 May 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:4033-DB
Cites 5 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment under Section 148 is valid even after processing under Section 143(1) without fresh tangible material, provided the Assessing Officer forms 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 143(1) Section 147 Section 148

Munna v. State

18 May 2016 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:4031

The Delhi High Court set aside the rape conviction due to unreliable prosecutrix testimony but upheld and modified the kidnapping conviction of the appellant.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant rape kidnapping prosecutrix testimony Section 164 Cr.P.C.

Ajanta Transistor Clock Manufacturing Co. v. Ajanta Limited

18 May 2016 · Manmohan Singh · 2016:DHC:4058

The Delhi High Court upheld a family settlement-based arbitral award restricting trademark use, holding that 'Ajanta Quartz' is not a separate mark and that lawful business restraints in the settlement are void but trademark restrictions are enforceable.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Memorandum of Understanding family settlement trademark Ajanta Ajanta Quartz

PFIZER PRODUCTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA

18 May 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:4032

The Delhi High Court upheld the DCGI's rejection of Pfizer's request to extend the expiry period of 'Medrol' beyond 60 months, declined to entertain the writ petition on expiry date issues pending before other High Courts, and directed withdrawal of stocks six months prior to expiry.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Drugs and Cosmetics Act expiry period Rule 96(1)(vii) DCGI

Rotomac Electricals Ltd. v. Union of India & Anr

18 May 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:4035

The Delhi High Court upheld penalty for non-fulfillment of export obligation under an advance licence due to petitioner’s failure to produce mandatory documents and rejected claims of exports prior to licence issuance.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 Advance Licence Export Obligation Duty Entitlement Exemption Certificate (DEEC) book

M/S TRANS ASIAN INDUSTRIES EXPOSITIONS PVT. LTD. v. SONI DAVE

18 May 2016 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; R.K. GAUBA · 2016:DHC:4059-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld consent decrees for possession based on clear admissions under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC but modified the quantum of user charges fixed without proper hearing.

civil appeal_partly_allowed Significant Order 12 Rule 6 CPC decree on admissions consent decree Order 23 Rule 3 CPC

M/S TRANS ASIAN INDUSTRIES EXPOSITIONS PVT. LTD. v. SONI DAVE

18 May 2016 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; R.K. GAUBA · 2016:DHC:4060-DB

The Delhi High Court reserved and pronounced judgment in a civil appeal filed by M/s Trans Asian Industries Expositions Pvt. Ltd. against Soni Dave concerning a commercial dispute.

civil other appeal commercial dispute Delhi High Court Division Bench

M/S TRUE BLAZE CLOTHING v. ANUJ TYAGI

18 May 2016 · Manmohan Singh · 2016:DHC:4079

The Delhi High Court appointed a substitute sole arbitrator under Section 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to continue arbitration proceedings after the original arbitrator withdrew.

civil petition_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 15 substitute arbitrator sole arbitrator withdrawal

Constable Mani Ram Gajraj v. Union of India & Others

18 May 2016 · Hima Kohli; Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:4091-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a CRPF constable without departmental inquiry for participation in a violent 1979 insubordination, affirming that inquiry may be dispensed with when impracticable amid rebellion.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant CRPF Rules 1955 Rule 27cc(ii) dismissal without inquiry collective insubordination

Mithlesh Kumar v. Union of India

18 May 2016 · Hima Kohli; Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:4090-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the summary dismissal of a CRPF personnel involved in a large-scale mutiny, holding that departmental enquiry could be dispensed with under exceptional circumstances as per established Supreme Court precedent.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant CRPF Rules summary dismissal departmental enquiry mutiny

Hariom v. Commissioner of Police & Anr.

18 May 2016 · Sanjiv Khanna; Najmi Waziri · 2016:DHC:4089-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a departmental candidate’s delayed claim for appointment under the open category in police recruitment, holding that limitation bars relief and candidates must apply under the correct category.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant departmental quota open category limitation Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

Ruchika Arora & Ors. v. Vinod Kumar & Ors.

18 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4076

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by applying the correct multiplier and allowing future prospects while rejecting insurer's challenge to income assessment based on post-death ITR and alleged rental income.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim loss of dependency multiplier future prospects

Aalam Khan v. State

18 May 2016 · Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:4088

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and ten-year sentence of a Hakim under Section 6 of the POCSO Act for sexually assaulting an eight-year-old girl, affirming the reliability of the child victim's testimony corroborated by medical evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act child sexual assault child witness reliability Section 6 POCSO

DDA v. Shalini Kanwar

18 May 2016 · Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:4087
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that victims must obtain leave of the High Court under Section 378(3) before appealing acquittal orders under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, dismissing revision petitions filed by the DDA as not maintainable.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant revision petition order of acquittal maintainability Code of Criminal Procedure

Kumar Pal Singh v. Union of India

18 May 2016 · Hima Kohli; Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:4086-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal without departmental enquiry of a CRPF personnel involved in a violent 1979 rebellion, rejecting claims of illegality and discrimination and emphasizing the disciplinary authority’s justified invocation of Rule 27(cc)(ii) of the CRPF Rules.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant CRPF Rules 1955 Departmental enquiry Dismissal from service Rebellion in disciplined force

DDA v. Shalini Kanwar

18 May 2016 · Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:4083
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a victim can appeal against an order of acquittal only after obtaining leave of the High Court under Section 378(3) CrPC, and dismissed revision petitions filed without such leave as not maintainable.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant revision petition order of acquittal maintainability victim's right to appeal