Delhi High Court

71,423 judgments

Year:

Vinod Kumar and Anr v. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co Ltd and Ors

11 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:3791
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation and interest in a motor accident claim, adding loss to estate and increasing non-pecuniary damages and interest rate to 9% per annum.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation enhancement loss of love and affection funeral expenses

ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd v. Manoj Kumar & Ors.

11 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:3790

The Delhi High Court reduced compensation awarded for motor accident injuries by rejecting unproven income assumptions and disallowing future prospects for a semi-skilled self-employed claimant, applying established precedents.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor vehicular accident compensation future prospects functional disability

North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Onika Mehrotra

11 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:3773-DB

The Delhi High Court held that nominated members of municipal corporations have voting rights and can contest for membership and Deputy Chairperson posts in committees but cannot contest for Chairperson posts, dismissing the review petition challenging this interpretation.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 nominated members Ward Committee Standing Committee

M/S Moolchand Khairati Ram Trust & Ors. v. Union of India

11 May 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:3768
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a lease granted for a charitable hospital is an institutional lease not eligible for freehold conversion under L&DO policy, dismissing the petitioners' claim.

property petition_dismissed Significant leasehold conversion freehold conversion institutional lease charitable hospital

Joseph Massey & Ors. v. Union of India

11 May 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:3766

The Delhi High Court held that writ petitions challenging show cause notices under the PMLA are premature and not maintainable unless issued without jurisdiction or patently illegal, dismissing the petition filed by non-executive directors of NSEL.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant show cause notice Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Article 226 jurisdiction

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

11 May 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:3770

The Delhi High Court upheld the Delhi Development Authority's retrospective fixation of licence fees and interest charges for petrol pump sites, ruling that such executive policy decisions based on market rates are not subject to judicial interference absent statutory violation.

property petition_dismissed Significant licence fee fixation retrospective increase Delhi Development Authority petrol pump sites

FNS Agro Foods Ltd. & Ors. v. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)

11 May 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:3781-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed Customs show cause notices against an exporter, holding that after DGFT's exoneration on the same allegations, Customs lacked jurisdiction to proceed.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 Customs Act, 1962 Export of Raw Meat Rules, 1992 DEPB Scheme

HSIL Ltd v. Oracle Ceramic and Ors.

11 May 2016 · Vipin Sanghi · 2016:DHC:3777
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a plaintiff company cannot sue for trademark infringement in Delhi under Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act based solely on a branch office presence when the cause of action and principal place of business lie elsewhere, and thus lacks territorial jurisdiction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction Section 134 Trade Marks Act carrying on business registered office

HSIL Ltd v. Oracle Ceramic and Ors.

11 May 2016 · Vipin Sanghi, J. · 2016:DHC:3776
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that it lacks territorial jurisdiction to entertain trademark infringement suits filed by a plaintiff company in Delhi when the cause of action arose elsewhere and the plaintiff’s principal place of business is outside Delhi.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction Section 134 Trade Marks Act Section 62 Copyright Act carrying on business

HSIL Ltd v. Oracle Ceramic and Ors.

11 May 2016 · Vipin Sanghi · 2016:DHC:3775
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held it lacked territorial jurisdiction under Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act to entertain trademark infringement suits filed by a plaintiff company whose principal place of business was outside Delhi and where the cause of action arose wholly elsewhere.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction Section 134 Trade Marks Act carrying on business registered office

NHPC Limited v. JV of Jaiprakash Associates Ltd & NCC Tunnelling

11 May 2016 · Manmohan · 2016:DHC:3774

The Delhi High Court held that interlocutory orders of an Arbitral Tribunal under Section 16 cannot be challenged by writ petition under Articles 226/227 and must await final award remedies under the Arbitration Act.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitral Tribunal Section 16 Arbitration and Conciliation Act Writ petition Articles 226 and 227

Yogesh Singh and Ors. v. The Union of India and Ors.

11 May 2016 · Hima Kohli; Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:3779

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking training for posts advertised in 2011 due to unexplained delay and the fact that vacancies had already been filled.

administrative petition_dismissed writ petition recruitment Central Armed Police Forces delay in filing

Mukesh Kumar v. Union of India

11 May 2016 · Hima Kohli; Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:3778

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition for lack of territorial jurisdiction but directed the respondents to dispose of the petitioner’s pending appeal within eight weeks.

administrative petition_dismissed territorial jurisdiction writ petition maintainability dismissal order appeal disposal

Bharti Airtel Limited & Ors. v. Union of India

11 May 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:3772

The Delhi High Court held that setting aside an arbitral award on merits under Section 34(2)(b)(ii) implies entitlement to the monetary claim, but the writ petition for refund was dismissed as the Court did not find the petitioner entitled to refund at this stage.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Public policy of India Refund of licence fee

Archana Agarwal v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

11 May 2016 · Sanjiv Khanna; Najmi Waziri · 2016:DHC:3893-DB

Delhi High Court held that eligibility for TGT appointment requires study of the subject as core or elective in all parts/years taught by the university, rejecting rigid 100-mark paper per year requirement as arbitrary.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Trained Graduate Teacher elective subject Recruitment Rules corrigendum

New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Neeraj & Ors.

10 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:3684

The Delhi High Court held that a deceased driver borrowing a vehicle with owner's permission is not a third party under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, and thus the insurer is not liable to pay compensation under a third party insurance policy.

motor_vehicle_accident_claims appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 163A third party insurance driver borrowing vehicle

National Insurance Company Ltd v. Saroj & Ors.

10 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:3683

The Delhi High Court upheld the causal link between accident injuries and death, recalculated compensation excluding future prospects due to lack of proof of employment nature, and ordered interest from the original petition date.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim loss of dependency future prospects non-pecuniary damages

National Insurance Company Ltd v. Saroj & Ors.

10 May 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:3675

The Delhi High Court upheld the causal link between accident injuries and death, excluded future prospects in dependency calculation due to unclear employment, and ordered interest from the original petition date, modifying the compensation awarded.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor vehicular accident compensation loss of dependency future prospects

M/S Viresh Buildcon Pvt. Ltd v. Neutral Access Operator Pvt Ltd

10 May 2016 · Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:9227

The Delhi High Court allowed withdrawal of criminal revision petitions without liberty to file fresh petitions, holding that subsequent developments cannot justify withdrawal with such liberty against the same impugned orders.

criminal petition_allowed withdrawal of revision petitions liberty to file fresh petition impugned order subsequent developments

M/S.LEELAWATI SMARAK ADHUNIK SHIKSHA SANSTHAN & ANR. v. M/S.HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.

10 May 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:8917-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging a DRT order after the petitioner gave up all merits pleas before the DRAT, directing the petitioner to first approach the appellate tribunal to challenge the concession.

civil petition_dismissed Debts Recovery Tribunal Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal writ petition concession