Delhi High Court

71,423 judgments

Year:

Sennheiser Electronics India Pvt Ltd v. Union of India & Ors

16 May 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:3481-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed the Show Cause Notice and proceedings relating to customs duty short levy for the period 2009-2011 but allowed adjudication to continue for the subsequent period, correcting dates in its earlier judgment.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Show Cause Notice customs duty Directorate of Revenue Intelligence adjudication proceedings

Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Union of India

16 May 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:3482-DB

The Delhi High Court corrected a clerical error in its judgment to accurately dispose of the writ petition and pending application filed by Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd.

other other correction of judgment clerical error writ petition disposal court order correction

Delhi Transport Corporation v. Om Prakash Sharma

16 May 2016 · V.K. Shali · 2016:DHC:3951

The Delhi High Court held that voluntary retirement does not imply surplus status without evidence, denying added pension benefits and dismissing claim for enhanced interest on delayed pension payments.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Voluntary Retirement Scheme Surplus employee Pension benefits CCS Pension Rules

Haridwar Parsad Singh v. State

16 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:3919

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for rioting under Section 149 IPC, ruling that the appellants formed an unlawful assembly with common intention despite variations in eyewitness accounts.

criminal appeal_dismissed unlawful assembly rioting common intention Section 149 IPC

Mr.R.S.Malik, Advocate v. STATE .....

16 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:3918

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for rioting under Section 149 IPC, holding that the appellants formed an unlawful assembly with a common object to commit offences during a violent clash between rival union factions.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant unlawful assembly rioting common object Section 149 IPC

Mr.R.S.Malik, Advocate v. STATE .....

16 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog · 2016:DHC:3917

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for rioting under Section 149 IPC, ruling that the appellants formed an unlawful assembly with common object to commit violence during a union rivalry at FCI.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant unlawful assembly common object rioting Section 149 IPC

Priya Desh Gupta v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

16 May 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:3957-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that reopening of income tax assessments based on a mere change of opinion without fresh tangible material is impermissible, quashing reassessment notices issued to promoter shareholders on non-compete fee taxability.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 147 Section 148 reopening of assessment

Bharat Singh v. Union of India

16 May 2016 · Ashutosh Kumar, J. · 2016:DHC:3925

The Delhi High Court condoned a 694-day delay in filing a land acquisition appeal, emphasizing a liberal, justice-oriented approach to 'sufficient cause' under the Limitation Act to avoid injustice to rural landowners.

civil appeal_allowed Significant condonation of delay Section 5 Limitation Act 1963 Section 54 Land Acquisition Act sufficient cause

Sarvjit Singh Slaria v. Union of India

16 May 2016 · Hima Kohli; Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:3926

The Delhi High Court directed petitioners to accept and shift to allotted government accommodations by a specified date, emphasizing timely compliance with procedural requirements including issuance of No Accommodation Certificates.

administrative petition_allowed No Accommodation Certificate Accommodation allotment Government accommodation Market rent liability

Deepak Vohra v. Union of India & Ors.

16 May 2016 · Hima Kohli; Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:3927

The Delhi High Court directed respondents to consider the petitioner's personal hardships sympathetically in allotting official accommodation and disposed of the petition accordingly.

administrative petition_dismissed official accommodation allotment personal hardship sympathetic consideration

Lt. Col Ar Harish v. Union of India

16 May 2016 · Hima Kohli; Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:3928

The court allowed petitioner No.1 to retain government accommodation till 12.06.2016 without market rent, subject to bearing rent already paid for May 2016, balancing changed circumstances with administrative interests.

administrative petition_allowed government accommodation allotment possession rent liability

Lt Col Amit Chatterjee v. Union of India and Ors.

16 May 2016 · Hima Kohli; Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:3929

The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner is not liable to pay market rent for existing accommodation until he occupies the offered premises or the offer is reallocated, with future rent demands subject to due process.

administrative petition_dismissed government accommodation market rent accommodation allotment writ petition

Delhi Metro Corporation Ltd. v. Sh. Rakesh Kumar Gupta & Anr.

16 May 2016 · Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:3924

The Delhi High Court allowed additional documentary evidence on land user classification under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC to ensure comprehensive adjudication of compensation in a land acquisition dispute.

property other Significant Order 41 Rule 27 CPC additional evidence land acquisition land user classification

Santosh Malik & Anr. v. Delhi Development Authority

16 May 2016 · V.K. Shali · 2016:DHC:3952

The Delhi High Court held that a basement used as a bank cellar is excluded from FAR calculation under applicable bye-laws, directing DDA to regularize the building and quashing demolition orders based on basement area counting.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Floor Area Ratio Basement usage Unified Building Bye Laws 2016 Master Plan of Delhi 2021

Dilbagh Singh & Anr. v. The State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

16 May 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:3923

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 323, 451, 506, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR amicable settlement inherent powers

Rohit Srivastava v. State & Ors.

16 May 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:3914

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279 and 304A IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR non-compoundable offences Section 279 IPC

Sunny Sehgal & Ors. v. State & Anr.

16 May 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:3913

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable criminal FIR arising from matrimonial disputes under Section 482 Cr.P.C. following an amicable settlement between the parties.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498-A IPC

Mohd. Anis & Anr v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

16 May 2016 · G.S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2016:DHC:3950-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a minor Muslim girl who has attained puberty has the right to reside with her husband and that such marriage is voidable, not void, under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

family petition_dismissed Significant minor marriage Muslim personal law puberty Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006

Green Box Sales Private Limited v. StyleGenie Digital Private Limited

16 May 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:3945

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between Green Box Sales Private Limited and StyleGenie Digital Private Limited under the Companies Act, 1956, dissolving the transferor company without winding up.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394 court sanction

BGK Commodities Private Limited v. BGK Infratech Private Limited

16 May 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:3946

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation of four transferor companies into a transferee company under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, after due compliance and no objections.

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