Delhi High Court

76,521 judgments

Year:

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -18 v. Silver Line

04 Nov 2015 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2015:DHC:9180-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

Failure to issue mandatory notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act prior to reassessment renders the reassessment order invalid, and such a jurisdictional defect can be raised at the appellate stage notwithstanding Section 292BB.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 143(2) Section 147 Section 148

Neeta Gupta v. The Commissioner of Police

04 Nov 2015 · Siddharth Mridul · 2015:DHC:9185-DB

The Delhi High Court directed police to provide adequate protection to a woman petitioner facing threats from her estranged husband, emphasizing the police's duty under Article 226 to safeguard personal liberty.

constitutional petition_allowed Article 226 writ of mandamus police protection personal liberty

Azad v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

04 Nov 2015 · Siddharth Mridul · 2015:DHC:9187-DB

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner based on credible alibi evidence and absence of charge sheet despite custodial detention in a mob violence case.

criminal appeal_allowed bail Section 439 Cr.P.C. false implication CCTV evidence

M/S GLOBAL EMB-TECH PTE.LTD. v. UNITY OVERSEAS (DELHI) PVT. LTD.

04 Nov 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:9173

The suit and counter claim between M/s Global Emb-Tech Pte. Ltd. and Unity Overseas (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. were disposed of as not pressed following a settlement between the parties.

civil settled settlement disposal of suit counter claim not pressed

Kamini & Anr v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors

04 Nov 2015 · Siddharth Mridul · 2015:DHC:9189-DB

The Delhi High Court directed police protection for petitioners alleging harassment and interference in their matrimonial life, upholding their fundamental rights under Article 21.

constitutional petition_allowed Article 226 Article 21 writ of prohibition writ of mandamus

Deepika Bansal v. The State

04 Nov 2015 · Siddharth Mridul · 2015:DHC:9188-DB

The Delhi High Court directed police to provide protection to a newly married couple facing threats, emphasizing the police's duty to safeguard citizens under Article 226.

constitutional petition_allowed Article 226 writ of mandamus police protection threats to life

Bhoop Singh v. State & Anr.

04 Nov 2015 · Suresh Kait · 2015:DHC:9156

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 498A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement and mutual divorce, emphasizing the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498A IPC

Nirmal Kaur v. Surjit Kaur & Ors.

04 Nov 2015 · Manmohan Singh, J. · 2015:DHC:9175

The Delhi High Court dismissed objections challenging the partition decree based on a valid Will and ordered physical division of the suit property, emphasizing that execution stage objections cannot delay enforcement of decrees upheld by the Supreme Court.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant partition suit Will probate execution petition

Monnet Ispat and Energy Limited v. Rohan Sanghvi

04 Nov 2015 · Manmohan Singh · 2015:DHC:9170

The Delhi High Court partly decreed a summary suit for the admitted refund amount under Order XXXVII CPC, refusing leave to defend that portion while allowing contest on the balance claims.

civil appeal_allowed Order XXXVII CPC summary suit admission of liability partial decree

Preetinder Singh Thapar v. Shri Hardeep Singh Thapar & Ors.

04 Nov 2015 · Manmohan Singh · 2015:DHC:9179

The Delhi High Court allowed amendment of the plaint to seek cancellation of a partition deed alleged to be forged, holding that such amendment does not introduce a new cause of action barred by limitation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant amendment of plaint Order VI Rule 17 CPC limitation cause of action

Nathu Ram v. Raj Bhushan Gupta

04 Nov 2015 · V.K. Shali · 2015:DHC:9186

The Delhi High Court allowed the tenant's revision petition, setting aside eviction and granting leave to defend on bona fide requirement and alternative accommodation grounds under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant leave to defend eviction bona fide requirement Section 14(1)(e)

M/S SAKATA INX(INDIA) LTD v. M/S REXOR INDIA LIMITED & ORS

04 Nov 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:9184

The Delhi High Court upheld a summary suit decree based on defendants' written acknowledgment of debt and dishonoured cheques, dismissing their defense for non-prosecution under Order XXXVII CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XXXVII CPC summary suit written acknowledgment dishonoured cheque

M/S INTER IKEA SYSTEMS B V v. QUESS CORP LIMITED

04 Nov 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:9174

The Delhi High Court set aside the trial court's order on trademark injunction due to errors and directed a rehearing while maintaining the interim injunction.

civil appeal_allowed trademark registration injunction Section 152 CPC Order 39 Rule 2A CPC

Prashant Maheshwari & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

04 Nov 2015 · Suresh Kait · 2015:DHC:9149

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 498A/406 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute based on an amicable settlement and dissolution of marriage, affirming the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to do so in such cases.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute non-compoundable offence

Manju Anand & Anr v. Geeta Chopra & Ors.

04 Nov 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:9192

The Delhi High Court dismissed a partition suit challenging a will and mutation of property, holding that prior judicial admissions estop plaintiffs from contesting inheritance and probate is not mandatory for immovable property in Delhi.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant succession certificate will probate mutation

JSL MEDIA LTD v. ADVERT COMMUNICATIONS PVT LTD

04 Nov 2015 · Manmohan Singh · 2015:DHC:9190

The Delhi High Court held that invoices and purchase orders acknowledged by the defendant constitute binding contracts enabling summary suit recovery, and rejected the defendant's leave to defend for lack of a bona fide defence.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant summary suit Order XXXVII CPC leave to defend invoice as contract

Ravi Saxena and Ors. v. The Secretary General, Lok Sabha Secretariat and Anr

04 Nov 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:9176

The Delhi High Court held that a waitlist panel is confined to originally notified vacancies and cannot be extended to subsequent vacancies without fresh advertisement, dismissing the petitioners' claim for appointment based on a 2008 waitlist.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant waitlist panel appointment vacancies parity in employment

Kamal Kant and Company LLP v. Raashee Fragrances India Pvt. Ltd.

04 Nov 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:9177

The Delhi High Court held that the defendant’s trade mark RAASHEE is deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s registered trade mark RAJSHREE for identical goods, granting an injunction against the defendant’s use of the mark.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trade mark infringement passing off deceptive similarity registered trade mark

National Highways Authority India v. M/S You One-Maharia (JV) & Ors.

04 Nov 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:9178

The Delhi High Court held that inability to furnish bank guarantees is not a defence in contempt proceedings and sentenced the respondents to six months imprisonment for wilful disobedience of court orders.

civil sentence_modified Significant contempt of court wilful disobedience bank guarantee mobilization advance

Neha Swarup v. Ankit Goel

04 Nov 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:9172

The Delhi High Court dismissed the civil suit for default and nonprosecution due to the plaintiff's failure to appear and prosecute the case despite multiple adjournments.

civil appeal_dismissed default nonprosecution dismissal of suit Order VI Rule 17 CPC