Delhi High Court

72,805 judgments

Year:

Gayatri Devi & Ors. v. Arshad Ali & Ors.

18 Mar 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:2337

The Delhi High Court held that future pay revisions cannot be considered for calculating loss of dependency in motor accident claims but enhanced non-pecuniary damages including loss of consortium are payable.

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

Sumitra & Ors. v. New India Assurance Co Ltd & Ors.

18 Mar 2016 · R. K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:2336

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal seeking enhancement of motor accident compensation, upholding the tribunal's assessment of income without future prospects and appropriate deduction for personal expenses.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 compensation loss of dependency future prospects

P.K. Jain v. Praveen Choudhary

18 Mar 2016 · R.K. Gauba · 2016:DHC:2340

The Delhi High Court upheld negligence of the Ambassador car driver in a motor accident, enhanced compensation for permanent disability including future medical and attendant expenses, and dismissed the respondents' appeal disputing liability and income evidence.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 rash and negligent driving compensation enhancement permanent disability

Anuj Kumar Tiwari v. State of the NCT of Delhi

18 Mar 2016 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2016:DHC:2327-DB

The Delhi High Court modified the appellant's conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC, holding that the killing occurred in a sudden fight without premeditation or cruelty.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant murder culpable homicide not amounting to murder Section 302 IPC Section 304 IPC

Pratap Verma v. State (NCT of Delhi)

18 Mar 2016 · Sunita Gupta · 2016:DHC:2329
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside non-bailable warrants issued prematurely against the petitioner, emphasizing that such warrants must be issued with extreme care balancing personal liberty and societal interest.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant non-bailable warrant personal liberty Article 21 issuance of warrants

Anamika Khurana v. Rajiv Khurana

18 Mar 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:2325

The Delhi High Court held that a binding Memorandum of Understanding settling maintenance rights precludes fresh statutory claims, limiting the plaintiff's remedy to enforcement of the MOU and dismissed the maintenance suit accordingly.

family appeal_dismissed Significant Memorandum of Understanding maintenance Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act

Harsh Bardhan v. Union of India and Ors.

18 Mar 2016 · Hima Kohli; Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:2324

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking appointment from the Reserved Panel as UPSC had already recommended the petitioner’s name, rendering further adjudication unnecessary.

administrative petition_dismissed appointment reserved panel General List Appointment Process UPSC recommendation

Lallan Jha & Ors. v. State & Anr.

18 Mar 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:2332-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following reconciliation between the married parties and withdrawal of related domestic violence proceedings.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute reconciliation

Sandeep Kundu v. The State & Anr.

18 Mar 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:2331-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406 and 498A IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute following a lawful and amicable settlement including mutual consent divorce and financial compensation.

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

Gulshan Joon & Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

18 Mar 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:2330-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406, 498A, and 34 IPC following the complainant's settlement with the accused and her withdrawal of prosecution.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC Article 226 Constitution Section 406 IPC

Vivekanand Singh v. Delhi Development Authority

18 Mar 2016 · Sanjiv Khanna; Najmi Waziri · 2016:DHC:2328-DB

The Delhi High Court held that acquittal in criminal proceedings does not bar departmental dismissal for misconduct and refused reinstatement to the petitioner.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant departmental disciplinary proceedings criminal acquittal standard of proof preponderance of probability

Polycab Electronics Private Limited v. Jaisingh Wires Private Limited

18 Mar 2016 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2016:DHC:2311

The Delhi High Court sanctioned a scheme of amalgamation under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, after ensuring statutory compliance and absence of objections from regulatory authorities.

corporate petition_allowed scheme of amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Section 391 Section 394

Springer Editorial Service Private Limited v. Springer (India) Private Limited

18 Mar 2016 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2016:DHC:2309

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between Springer Editorial Service Private Limited and Springer (India) Private Limited under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, finding no objections and compliance with statutory requirements.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Section 391 Section 394

Renu Sharma v. GNCT of Delhi and Ors.

18 Mar 2016 · Manmohan J · 2016:DHC:2302

The Delhi High Court directed the State to provide free medical treatment, reimburse medical expenses beyond prescribed limits, and grant compassionate employment to an acid attack victim, emphasizing the State's duty to ensure adequate relief.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant acid attack victim compensation medical treatment Delhi Victims Compensation Scheme 2015

Dr. Professor Santosh Panda v. Indira Gandhi National Open University

18 Mar 2016 · Ved Prakash Vaish · 2016:DHC:2303

The Delhi High Court held that a deputationist has no vested right to continue on deputation beyond the sanctioned period and the refusal to extend deputation without reasons does not violate natural justice.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant deputation extraordinary leave fixed tenure natural justice

Arun Gogia & Ors. v. State (G.N.C.T. Delhi) & Anr.

18 Mar 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:2316

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable criminal FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes 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 appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC matrimonial dispute

Sunder Singh & Ors. v. The State & Ors.

18 Mar 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:2314

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable criminal FIR under Sections 308/34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR non-compoundable offences compromise

Anselem Lyke Nwoso v. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

18 Mar 2016 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:2334-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and sentence for possession of commercial quantity heroin, denied bail during appeal, and held that delayed sample collection did not vitiate the trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant NDPS Act Section 21(c) Section 37 NDPS Section 389 CrPC

Vinod Kumar Abbey v. M/S Mountain Fallindia Pvt Ltd

18 Mar 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:8566-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC is maintainable if a liquidated amount is claimed based on a written contract and directed fresh consideration of leave to defend application, setting aside the dismissal of the suit.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XXXVII CPC summary suit liquidated amount leave to defend

State of NCT of Delhi v. Sandeep & Ors.

18 Mar 2016 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2016:DHC:2347-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's petition seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal of accused in a murder and robbery case, affirming the trial court's detailed appreciation of evidence and witness credibility.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant last seen evidence acquittal murder recovery of stolen property