Delhi High Court

81,561 judgments

Year:

Parmanand v. State and Another

04 Aug 2015 · Suresh Kait, J. · 2015:DHC:6190

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC based on a settlement between parties, affirming the High Court's power under Section 482 CrPC to quash non-compoundable offences where justice so requires.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC non-compoundable offences settlement agreement

Sourav Taneja v. Swati Taneja

04 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:6222

The Delhi High Court declined to quash a domestic violence complaint on limitation grounds, directing the trial court to expeditiously decide the pending application for dismissal under Section 468 Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_dismissed Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12 complaint limitation period Section 468 Cr.P.C.

Sai Nath Enterprises v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr

03 Aug 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:11524-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed the demand and blacklisting orders against the appellant, directing the respondents to pass a speaking order after hearing, emphasizing natural justice and consistency with prior similar decisions.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant licence fee blacklisting principles of natural justice speaking order

Gaurav Malhotra & Ors. v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

03 Aug 2015 · Suresh Kait · 2015:DHC:6128

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 323, 341, 506, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC while imposing costs for misuse of public resources.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR non-compoundable offences settlement between parties

Sachin Jain v. State & Anr.

03 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:6156

The Delhi High Court reduced the interim maintenance payable under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 to 50% of the petitioner's income, emphasizing a flexible and reasonable approach based on actual earning capacity.

family appeal_allowed Significant interim maintenance Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 maintenance quantum earning capacity

Director General E.S.I.C v. Dr. Satish Kumar Azad & Ors.

03 Aug 2015 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015:DHC:6175-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld that uncommunicated adverse entries in Annual Confidential Reports cannot be relied upon for denying promotions, reaffirming the principle that every ACR entry must be communicated to the employee within a reasonable time.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Annual Confidential Report ACR communication Departmental Promotion Committee natural justice

Mangla Singhi v. Union of India

03 Aug 2015 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015:DHC:11541-DB

The High Court set aside the Tribunal's dismissal of the petitioner's application on limitation grounds and remanded the matter for hearing on the substantive grievance of discriminatory shortlisting criteria by UPSC.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Central Administrative Tribunal UPSC recruitment shortlisting criteria discrimination in recruitment

Commissioner of Income Tax-VT v. L'LJi!JI1 Video Electronics Pvt. Ltd.

03 Aug 2015 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2015:DHC:11360-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeals, holding that lease rental income reversal and tax treatment by the assessee were appropriate in the absence of a claim under Section 32AB of the Income Tax Act.

tax appeal_dismissed Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 32AB lease rental income accrual basis

Gurcharan Singh Walia v. Renu Goyal

03 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:11150

The Delhi High Court dismissed two criminal miscellaneous petitions as withdrawn on the petitioner's unconditional request.

criminal petition_dismissed Procedural withdrawal of petition dismissal as withdrawn criminal miscellaneous petition High Court of Delhi

Smt Bala v. State

03 Aug 2015 · Indermeet Kaur · 2015:DHC:10946

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for abduction and rape of a minor but modified sentences by treating the period of incarceration already served as the sentence, exercising discretion under the proviso to Section 376 IPC.

criminal sentence_modified Significant abduction minor consent Section 363 IPC

Preeti Wadhwan v. State

03 Aug 2015 · Ashutosh Kumar · 2015:DHC:10666

The Delhi High Court granted interim protection from arrest to petitioners in anticipatory bail applications pending before the trial court due to lawyers' abstention, directing no coercive action until the next hearing date.

criminal petition_allowed anticipatory bail interim protection abstention of lawyers delay in adjudication

WG. CDR. (RETD.) SH. YESHVIR SINGH TOMAR v. DR. O. P. KOHLI & ORS

03 Aug 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:6138

The Delhi High Court dismissed a suit for declaration and possession holding that an unregistered and unstamped Agreement to Sell and an improperly stamped Power of Attorney cannot confer ownership rights under the amended Transfer of Property Act and Indian Stamp Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Agreement to Sell Section 53A Transfer of Property Act Indian Stamp Act Article 23A

INDIA INFOLINE & Ors. v. State & Anr.

03 Aug 2015 · Suresh Kait · 2015:DHC:6132

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 409/406 IPC based on an amicable settlement at the investigation stage, imposing costs to compensate public resources.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR settlement between parties non-compoundable offences

Kamal Deep Singh & Ors. v. State & Anr.

03 Aug 2015 · Suresh Kait · 2015:DHC:6133

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute based on an amicable settlement and mutual divorce, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

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

Jugal Kishore Khanna v. The Swatantra House Building Society Ltd

03 Aug 2015 · Vipin Sanghi · 2015:DHC:6134

The Delhi High Court held that procedural lapses in substituting legal representatives of a deceased plaintiff do not render a decree non-est if the parties had notice, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter for merits.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Legal Representatives Order 22 Rule 3 CPC substitution of parties cause title

Daleep Singh Chandrawat v. State

03 Aug 2015 · Vipin Sanghi · 2015:DHC:6129

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of an official under the Official Secrets Act for unauthorized possession and attempted communication of secret defense documents, affirming statutory presumptions and validating recovery despite minor procedural lapses.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Official Secrets Act, 1923 Section 3(1)(c) Section 9 secret documents

M/S DELHI AUTO & GENERAL FINANCE PVT. LTD. v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

03 Aug 2015 · SURESH KAIT, J. · 2015:DHC:6127

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 420 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties at the investigation stage, emphasizing the court's inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in commercial disputes.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 420 IPC Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR settlement agreement

Sharafat Ali & Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

03 Aug 2015 · Suresh Kait · 2015:DHC:6125

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal case under Sections 323, 452, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR non-compoundable offences settlement between parties

Sanjay Kapur & Ors. v. Vikram Kapur & Ors.

03 Aug 2015 · S. Muralidhar · 2015:DHC:6124

The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitration award directing division of assets of a public limited company, holding that family MoUs and arbitration awards cannot bind the company without compliance with the Companies Act and statutory procedures.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Memorandum of Understanding Atlas Cycles (Haryana) Limited public limited company

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Canon India Private Limited

03 Aug 2015 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2015:DHC:6135-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld that unutilised subsidies received for specific promotional purposes are held in trust and not income, and remanded the transfer pricing issue of subsidy exclusion from AMP expenditure for reconsideration by the Tribunal.

tax appeal_allowed Significant transfer pricing Advertisement Marketing and Promotional expenditure subsidy unutilised subsidy