Delhi High Court

71,423 judgments

Year:

Major Saumitra Sarkar (Retd.) v. Ms. Shikha Chakraborty & Ors.

17 May 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:3990

The Delhi High Court upheld the plaintiff's interim injunction to construct on the terrace floor of a property, holding that ownership rights were never transferred to defendants and construction could proceed subject to sanctioned plans and undertakings.

civil appeal_allowed Significant interim injunction Order XXXIX CPC collaboration agreement terrace rights

M/S SVOGL OIL GAS & ENERGY LTD. v. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.

17 May 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:4007

The Delhi High Court upheld Indian Oil Corporation's blacklisting of the petitioner, holding that a show cause notice and consideration of reply suffice without mandatory personal hearing or communication of reasons, and arbitration does not bar blacklisting.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant blacklisting natural justice personal hearing show cause notice

Shailendra Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

17 May 2016 · Hima Kohli; Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:3991

The Delhi High Court upheld the employer’s discretion in declaring a candidate medically unfit for BSF recruitment, dismissing the petitioner’s challenge to the Review Medical Examination.

administrative petition_dismissed medical fitness paramilitary recruitment Review Medical Examination employer discretion

Kishore Kumar v. State

17 May 2016 · S.P. Garg · 2016:DHC:3987

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Kishore Kumar, upholding his conviction for criminal conspiracy and kidnapping of a minor under Sections 120B and 368 IPC, emphasizing inference of intention from conduct and failure to follow legal adoption procedures.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant kidnapping criminal conspiracy Section 120B IPC Section 368 IPC

Bharat Bhandari v. State

17 May 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:4028-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed parole to a life convict of multiple murders on grounds of special circumstances, satisfactory conduct, and the need to maintain family ties, overruling the parole authority's rejection.

criminal petition_allowed Significant parole life imprisonment Parole/Furlough Guidelines 2010 multiple murders

Abdul Sattar v. State (NCT of Delhi)

17 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:3977-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Abdul Sattar for murder and robbery based on last seen evidence, recovery of stolen property, and failure to satisfactorily explain incriminating circumstances.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant last seen evidence Section 302 IPC Section 394 IPC Section 313 CrPC

Raju Kumar Verma v. State (Govt. of NCT) of Delhi

17 May 2016 · Mukta Gupta, J. · 2016:DHC:3975

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a man for kidnapping and raping a minor girl, ruling that consent of a girl below 16 years is immaterial, but modified the sentence to reduce the term of imprisonment.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant kidnapping minor rape minor consent immaterial proof of age

Ajay Jain v. Karan Mehra & Anr

17 May 2016 · Vipin Sanghi · 2016:DHC:3978

The Delhi High Court held that an executing court cannot award interest on a decretal amount if no claim or direction for interest was made or granted in the original decree.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant executing court interest on decretal amount execution proceedings decree

Jahid v. State

17 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:3981

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for kidnapping, molestation, and abduction of a minor but reduced the sentence, ruling out rape due to lack of medical evidence of penetration.

criminal appeal_allowed Section 363 IPC Section 354 IPC Section 367 IPC Section 376 IPC

Pramod Kumar v. State

17 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:3980

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction for rape based on credible prosecutrix testimony despite inconclusive DNA evidence, dismissing the appellant's appeal.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant rape prosecutrix testimony DNA evidence corroboration

Mogli @ Som Lal v. State

17 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:3984

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellant for robbery committed with a deadly weapon under Section 397 IPC based on strong corroborative evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 397 IPC robbery with deadly weapon knife recovery apprehension at spot

National Insurance Co Ltd v. Pushpa Devi

17 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4002
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by including all regular allowances in monthly income, deducting income tax, adding future prospects, and increasing non-pecuniary damages in line with Supreme Court precedents.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 loss of dependency transport allowance conveyance allowance

Shalu Nigam v. The Regional Passport Officer

17 May 2016 · Manmohan · 2016:DHC:3982

The Delhi High Court held that a passport can be issued without mentioning the biological father's name when the father has abdicated responsibilities, emphasizing the child's right to identity and the mother's status as natural guardian.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant passport issuance father's name single parent child's identity

Ankita Choudhary v. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University

17 May 2016 · Manmohan · 2016:DHC:3983
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a university cannot alter OBC reservation eligibility criteria mid-admission process to the detriment of candidates and quashed a last-minute notification restricting OBC certificates to those issued by Delhi authorities for the 2016-17 PG medical admissions.

administrative petition_allowed Significant OBC reservation caste certificate prospectus admission process

KRISHNA SOBTI v. STATE

17 May 2016 · Indermeet Kaur, J. · 2016:DHC:3993

The Delhi High Court held that probate is not required for a Hindu Will in Delhi for granting a succession certificate, allowing the petitioner's appeal and setting aside the lower courts' orders.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 213 Section 370 Section 372

Sarabjeet Singh v. Anup Sharma & Ors.

17 May 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:3995
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for specific performance of two agreements to sell urban property, holding that time was of the essence, the plaintiff breached the contract by failing to tender payment timely, and was not always ready and willing to perform.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant specific performance agreement to sell time of essence readiness and willingness

Neelam Kumari v. GNCTD & Anr.

17 May 2016 · Sanjiv Khanna; Najmi Waziri · 2016:DHC:4025-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a candidate who passed an examination before the cutoff date possesses the essential qualification despite subsequent improvement exams, and rejected cancellation of the earlier marksheet as a ground for disqualification.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant eligibility criteria improvement examination marksheet cancellation essential qualification

J B Gupta & Ors. v. State

17 May 2016 · Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:4024
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a victim cannot appeal against an acquittal before the Sessions Court without obtaining leave of the High Court under Section 378(3) CrPC, setting aside the impugned order allowing such appeal.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant victim's right to appeal order of acquittal Section 372 CrPC proviso Section 378 CrPC leave to appeal

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Man Mohan & Ors.

17 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4023

The Delhi High Court modified the compensation by excluding future prospects due to lack of evidence and held the insurer liable despite the forged driving license, rejecting the plea for exoneration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation future prospects dependency loss

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Rajender Prasad

17 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:4021

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by rejecting contributory negligence, recalculating loss of future income based on superannuation age, and awarding additional damages for post-judgment surgeries and suffering.

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