Delhi High Court

82,660 judgments

Year:

Iqrar Ahmed & Ors. v. Allauddin

15 Apr 2015 · V.K. Shali · 2015:DHC:3400

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal, affirming that without proof of hostile possession, appellants cannot claim ownership by adverse possession or permanent injunction against dispossession.

civil appeal_dismissed adverse possession declaration of ownership permanent injunction peaceful possession

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I v. MIS BHARTI TELETECH LTD.

15 Apr 2015 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; R.K. GAUBA · 2015:DHC:3399-DB
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the allowance of depreciation on payment for marketing and commercial rights acquired by the assessee, holding such rights qualify as intangible assets under Section 32(1) Explanation 3(b) of the Income Tax Act.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant depreciation intangible assets goodwill Section 32 Income Tax Act

Jamil Khan & Ors v. Union of India & Ors

15 Apr 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:3363-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, regardless of possession disputes.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings non-payment of compensation

Kanta Devi & Another v. Union of India & Ors

15 Apr 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:3366-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, regardless of possession disputes.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) of 2013 Act Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings non-payment of compensation

Devender Kumar v. Rajesh Sharma & Ors.

15 Apr 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:3367

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 186, 332, and 353 IPC based on a mediated settlement, applying the principles of inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in non-heinous offences.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR mediated settlement non-heinous offences

Manoj Kumar & Ors. v. The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

15 Apr 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:3368

The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC based on a fully complied mediated settlement, applying the principles of Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute mediated settlement

Deepak Dhawan v. State & Anr

15 Apr 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:3369

The Delhi High Court quashed a Section 498-A IPC FIR arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

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

PAN INDIA MOTORS PVT. LTD. & ANR. v. STATE & ANR.

15 Apr 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:3370

The Delhi High Court quashed a complaint under Section 138 NI Act for lack of territorial jurisdiction, allowing re-filing before the competent Mumbai court.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act territorial jurisdiction complaint quashing dishonor of cheque

Manoj Sharawat & Ors. v. The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

15 Apr 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:3362

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 452, 308, and 34 IPC and Arms Act provisions based on amicable settlement and cleared misunderstanding, applying the principles governing quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.

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

Hira Realtors Pvt. Ltd. v. State & Anr.

15 Apr 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:3365

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings arising from a commercial dispute after the parties amicably settled through mediation, applying the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR mediation commercial dispute

Indian Association for Social Psychiatry v. Union of India & Another

15 Apr 2015 · The Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2015:DHC:3364-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking enhanced psychiatry education and facilities, holding that courts should not interfere with expert policy decisions of the Medical Council of India regarding medical curriculum and resource allocation.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant mental health psychiatry curriculum Medical Council of India judicial review

Gaurav Sharma & Ors. v. State & Anr.

14 Apr 2015 · Sunita Gupta · 2015:DHC:10778

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under multiple IPC sections on the ground of amicable settlement between parties, imposing costs on petitioners to compensate the State.

criminal appeal_allowed Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR amicable settlement compromise

Karamveer Thakran v. Seema

13 Apr 2015 · Kailash Gambhir; I. S. Mehta · 2015:DHC:11679-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's civil appeal in default and for non-prosecution due to his failure to appear at the hearing.

civil appeal_dismissed appeal dismissal non-prosecution default appellant non-appearance

Supreme Court in Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union and v. Ann, 2013(11) SCALE 329

13 Apr 2015 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2015:DHC:11010

The Delhi High Court directed constitution and functioning of the Town Vending Committee under the Street Vendors Act, 2014, holding that disputes about street vendors' status must be resolved by the Committee and refused interim injunctions against eviction pending its decision.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Street Vendors Act 2014 Section 3(3) Town Vending Committee street vendors

38daa68c456c7c6fd78788ca767b7f95980b7873efd4bcd16a45245be8b9dce8

13 Apr 2015 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2015:DHC:11009

The Delhi High Court held that street vendors squatting at sites are protected from removal or relocation under the Street Vendors Act, 2014 until the statutory survey is completed.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Street Vendors Act 2014 Section 3(1) Section 3(3) status quo

Leisure Builder Pvt. Ltd. v. Shanti Swarup Bhadana

13 Apr 2015 · S. Muralidhar · 2015:DHC:10742

The Delhi High Court terminated the mandate of the named arbitrator due to impartiality concerns and procedural irregularities and appointed a new arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Impartiality of arbitrator Termination of arbitrator's mandate Section 14 Arbitration Act

Naveen v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

13 Apr 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:3329

The Delhi High Court set aside the rejection of a drug licence application for a pharmacy in a JJ cluster, directing reconsideration based on possession slip evidence and prior judicial recognition under MPD-2021.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant drug licence JJ cluster possession slip DUSIB

SH KRISHAN KUMAR KATHURIA v. SH INDER KUMAR KATHURIA

13 Apr 2015 · Manmohan Singh · 2015:DHC:3312

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity and enforceability of a compromise decree under Order XXIII CPC, rejecting challenges based on lack of consideration and directing execution of documents by a Local Commissioner to enforce the decree.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant compromise decree Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC Section 2(2) CPC execution proceedings

Chander Bhushan Dubey v. Union of India & Anr

13 Apr 2015 · The Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2015:DHC:3297-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the intra-court appeal and refused to condone delay in filing and re-filing the appeal due to lack of sufficient cause and repeated unexplained delays.

civil appeal_dismissed condonation of delay intra-court appeal writ petition dismissal sufficient cause

Prestige Foods Ltd. v. The STC of India

13 Apr 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2015:DHC:3298

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitration award in favor of Prestige Foods Ltd. but reduced the interest rate from 18% to 10%, clarifying that unilateral arbitration reference is valid and unauthorized bank charge deductions are impermissible.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration agreement bank charges tripartite agreement arbitrability