Delhi High Court

81,413 judgments

Year:

Allied Strips Ltd & Ors v. BDRBuilders and Developers Pvt Ltd

21 May 2015 · S. Muralidhar · 2015:DHC:11790

The Delhi High Court set aside an ex parte interim order passed by the Sole Arbitrator for lack of opportunity to the Appellants and remanded the matter for fresh consideration after hearing both parties.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 17 Section 37 interim order

Swararaj @Raj Shrikant Thackeray v. The State & Ors

21 May 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:11161

The Delhi High Court dismissed as infructuous petitions challenging complaints already dismissed by the trial court, granting liberty to challenge if complaints are revived.

criminal petition_dismissed criminal miscellaneous petition complaint dismissal infructuous petition liberty to challenge

Pradeep Kumar Aggarwal & Ors. v. State thru Food Inspector (PFA) Govt of NCT of Delhi

21 May 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:11144

The Delhi High Court held that objections to applicability of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act to gutka must be raised before the trial court at the notice framing stage, refusing to quash proceedings under its inherent jurisdiction.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 482 CrPC Section 251 CrPC Prevention of Food Adulteration Act Gutka

Nishan Singh Bhatti & Ors. v. State & Ors.

21 May 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:4597

The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR against bonafide purchasers in a property forgery case based on a settlement between parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR compromise in criminal cases forgery

Tarun Pal Singh v. Lt. Governor, Govt. of NCT of Delhi

21 May 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:4609-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that landowners whose compensation under the 1894 Act was not fully paid within five years before the 2013 Act's commencement are entitled to compensation under the 2013 Act as per the first proviso after Section 24(2).

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Section 24 provisos Compensation entitlement

Shanti Devi & Ors. v. Kishan Gupta & Ors.

21 May 2015 · V.K. Shali · 2015:DHC:4619

The Delhi High Court held that in a suit for possession based on title, Article 65 of the Limitation Act applies, requiring limitation to be counted from the date possession became adverse, and dismissed the appeal challenging this principle.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Limitation Act, 1963 Article 64 Article 65 Adverse possession

Shashi Sharma v. Doon Public School

21 May 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:4617

The Delhi High Court upheld private schools' liability to pay gratuity to teachers for service periods before and after 3.4.1997, clarifying that disputes post-applicability of the Payment of Gratuity Act must be resolved by the competent authority under the Act.

labor petition_dismissed Significant gratuity Delhi School Education Act, 1973 Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Section 10(1) DSEAR

M/S ZHUHAI HANSEN TECHNOLOGY CO LTD v. M/S SHILPI CABLE TECHNOLOGIES LTD

21 May 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:4591

The Delhi High Court allowed refund of court fees to a foreign plaintiff following settlement through court-annexed mediation, directing issuance of the refund certificate in the name of the plaintiff's counsel.

civil petition_allowed court fees refund Section 16 Court Fees Act court-annexed mediation settlement agreement

WIN-MEDICARE PVT LTD v. M/S S R FORMULATIONS INDIA PVT LTD & ANR

21 May 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:4590

The Delhi High Court decreed a civil suit in terms of a voluntary out-of-court settlement arrived at by the parties during the pendency of the proceedings.

civil appeal_allowed out-of-court settlement decree in terms of settlement Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC voluntary settlement

Harjit Kaur v. Jasbir Kaur & Ors.

21 May 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:4589

The Delhi High Court converted a preliminary decree based on a family settlement into a final decree with parties' consent, allowing independent implementation and execution if necessary.

civil appeal_allowed family settlement preliminary decree final decree Memorandum of Family Settlement

SSG Multiproducts Private Limited v. SSG Pharma Private Limited

21 May 2015 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2015:DHC:4613

The Delhi High Court allowed the application to dispense with convening meetings of shareholders and creditors for approving a Scheme of Amalgamation where all parties had given written consent.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act, 1956 Section 391(1) dispensing meetings

Ranoson Springs Private Limited v. Ranoson Products Private Limited

21 May 2015 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2015:DHC:4614

The Delhi High Court allowed a joint application to dispense with convening meetings of shareholders and creditors for approval of a Scheme of Arrangement under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, based on unanimous written consents.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Arrangement Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 and 394 demerger

Dedicated Investments Private Limited v. AL Consultants Private Limited

21 May 2015 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2015:DHC:4615

The Delhi High Court allowed the application to dispense with convening meetings of shareholders and creditors for a Scheme of Amalgamation where all parties consented and no creditors existed.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act, 1956 Sections 391 and 394 dispensing meetings

Leading Point Powertronics Private Limited v. ERD Technologies Private Limited

21 May 2015 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2015:DHC:4611

The Delhi High Court allowed the application to dispense with convening meetings of shareholders and creditors for approving a Scheme of Amalgamation where majority consents were obtained under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 dispensing with meetings shareholders consent

Dr. Yashwant Singh & Anr. v. Indian Bank & Anr.

21 May 2015 · The Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2015:DHC:4579-DB

The Delhi High Court held that classification of a loan account as NPA by a secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act is not a jurisdictional fact subject to judicial review at the Section 13(3A) stage, dismissing the writ petition and affirming the statutory remedy before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant SARFAESI Act Section 13(2) Section 13(3A) Non-Performing Asset

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi Central-III v. Vishan Das

21 May 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:4585-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld that interest under Section 245D(2C) of the Income Tax Act is not leviable if the assessee deposits tax on admitted income within the prescribed time during settlement proceedings.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 245D(2C) Income Tax Act Settlement Commission Interest on tax

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi Central -III v. Govind Lal

21 May 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:4586-DB

The Delhi High Court heard appeals filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax against orders involving respondents Govind Lal and Ved Prakash, referencing a related decision in ITA 404/2013.

tax other Income Tax Appeal Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi High Court Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi Central -III v. Govind Lal

21 May 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:4584-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, upholding the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's decision to set aside flawed tax assessments against the respondents.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal tax assessment appellate jurisdiction

Ved Pal v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

21 May 2015 · S.P. Garg · 2015:DHC:4583

The Delhi High Court set aside the conviction of Ved Pal for kidnapping and sexual assault due to insufficient and inconsistent prosecution evidence, emphasizing the benefit of doubt in criminal trials.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant kidnapping sexual assault Section 342 IPC Section 368 IPC

Cadet Vivek Boora v. Union of India & Ors.

21 May 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2015:DHC:4574-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the medical boards' decision declaring a cadet medically unfit due to the high risk of renal stone recurrence associated with spina bifida and renal calculus, dismissing the petition challenging the fitness declaration.

medical jurisprudence / administrative petition_dismissed Significant renal calculus spina bifida medical fitness armed forces