Delhi High Court

93,563 judgments

Year:

Abhipra Capital Ltd & Ors. v. State & Anr

06 Feb 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:1218

The Delhi High Court quashed two FIRs under Sections 406/420/409/506/120-B/34 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement inherent powers of High Court

Chemico Manufacturers (India) Limited v. Vimal Organics Limited

06 Feb 2015 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2015:DHC:1227

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 in writing under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394 dispensation of meetings

M/s. Ganges Concast Industries Limited v. M/s. Salasar Stainless Limited

06 Feb 2015 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2015:DHC:1228

The Delhi High Court allowed the transferee company's application to dispense with convening meetings of shareholders and creditors for a Scheme of Amalgamation involving its wholly owned subsidiary, holding that no adverse effect on creditor rights justified such dispensation.

corporate petition_allowed Significant Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Section 391(1) Section 394

M/s. Lifelong Finishing Academy Private Limited v. M/s. Lifelong Real Estate Private Limited

06 Feb 2015 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2015:DHC:1229

The Delhi High Court allowed a joint application to dispense with convening meetings of shareholders and creditors for approval of a Scheme of Amalgamation among closely held companies where all such parties had given written consent.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Section 391(1) Section 394

Vikas Yadav v. State of UP

06 Feb 2015 · Gita Mittal; J. R. Midha · 2015:DHC:1202-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for murder and related offences, emphasized principled sentencing under the 'rarest of rare' doctrine, affirmed appellate jurisdiction to enhance sentences, and mandated victim compensation under Section 357 CrPC.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant death penalty life imprisonment rarest of rare Section 357 CrPC

City Palace Electronics (P) Ltd v. M/S Sony India (P) Ltd

06 Feb 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:1560-DB

The Delhi High Court held that goods sold on principal-to-principal basis vest ownership in the buyer, dismissed Sony's claim to repossess goods, set aside warranty-related interim directions beyond suit scope, and imposed costs on Sony for frivolous pleadings.

civil appeal_allowed Significant principal to principal sale legal ownership of goods interim injunction Order 37 CPC

Kuldip Kaur v. Smt Surinder Kaur

05 Feb 2015 · Suresh Kait · 2015:DHC:1166

The Delhi High Court set aside a sale deed executed in violation of an injunction order, holding such transactions null and void and emphasizing the court's power to enforce its orders.

civil petition_allowed Significant injunction order violation of court order sale deed nullity contempt of court

Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/S Kuber Mutual Benefit Ltd.

05 Feb 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:1163-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT’s ruling that one-time financing charges are not interest under the Interest Tax Act, dismissing the tax department’s appeal.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Interest Tax Act, 1974 processing charges financing charges interest definition

M/S PROLATIVE ESTATE PVT LTD v. M/S INDIAN GROUP REAL ESTATE & ORS

05 Feb 2015 · JAYANT NATH · 2015:DHC:1201

The Delhi High Court decreed recovery of Rs. 22,60,000 with interest in favour of the plaintiff for advance paid for land not delivered by defendants who failed to appear and whose cheques were dishonoured.

civil appeal_allowed advance payment recovery suit dishonoured cheque ex-parte proceedings

M/S SAI INTERNATIONAL v. M/S KAIZER & ORS.

05 Feb 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:1162

The Delhi High Court recorded and enforced a settlement agreement with additional terms, ordered release of title deeds, disposed of the suit, and granted partial court fees refund under Section 16-A of the Court Fees Act.

civil settled Settlement Agreement Installment Payment Interest on Delayed Payment Forfeiture Clause

Munni Begum (Deceased) Thr Her Legal Heirs v. Jagbir Singh Yadav & Ors

05 Feb 2015 · V. K. Shali · 2015:DHC:1188

The Delhi High Court upheld rejection of a suit for declaration and injunction for failure to claim possession, emphasizing the necessity to claim possession along with declaration when dispossessed.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC Specific Relief Act 1963 declaration suit possession

Harish Chand v. Mukesh Kumar & Ors.

05 Feb 2015 · Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:1189

The Delhi High Court upheld eviction without trial based on undisputed oral family settlement and bona fide requirement, emphasizing that tenants must prima facie substantiate defenses at the leave to defend stage under Section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant eviction leave to defend oral family settlement bona fide requirement

Sandeep v. State (NCT of Delhi)

05 Feb 2015 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015:DHC:1159

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant in a murder case due to failure of the prosecution to establish a complete and conclusive chain of circumstantial evidence beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen evidence Section 302 IPC benefit of doubt

Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/S Modern Industrial Enterprises

05 Feb 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:1198-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Commissioner's jurisdiction under Section 38A but remanded the case for reassessment of duty liability without proportional apportionment in a clandestine removal dispute.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Central Excise Act Section 38A territorial jurisdiction show cause notice

Orix Auto Infrastructure Services Ltd. v. Commissioner, DVAT, Delhi & Ors

05 Feb 2015 · Sanjiv Khanna; V. Kameswar Rao · 2015:DHC:11998-DB

The Delhi High Court reserved and later pronounced judgment on sales tax appeals filed by Orix Auto Infrastructure Services Ltd. against the Commissioner of DVAT concerning tax assessments.

tax Sales Tax Appeal Delhi Value Added Tax DVAT assessment

M/S BHATIA INDUSTRIES & OTHERS v. M/S PANDEY INDUSTRIES & OTHERS

05 Feb 2015 · NAJMIWAZIRI · 2015:DHC:11865

The Delhi High Court decreed the plaintiff's trademark suit based on the defendants' admission of non-use and withdrawal of their suit.

civil appeal_allowed trademark infringement admission in court withdrawal of suit decree

Dwarkadhis Projects (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax-IV

05 Feb 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:11596-DB

The Delhi High Court held that income tax assessments cannot be transferred under Section 127 without prior communication of reasons to the assessee, ensuring an opportunity to object, and set aside the transfer order for non-compliance with natural justice.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 127 Income-tax Act transfer of income tax assessment principles of natural justice communication of reasons

Kamla Singhavi v. New Delhi Municipal Council

05 Feb 2015 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2015:DHC:11552

The Delhi High Court directed reassessment and refund of excess property tax paid under mistake, applying the principle that tax paid under ignorance of law must be refunded.

tax appeal_allowed Significant property tax excess tax refund unit area method NDMC Bye-Laws 2009

Vijay Kumar v. State

05 Feb 2015 · Sunita Gupta · 2015:DHC:10565

The Delhi High Court dismissed anticipatory bail applications in a groundwater theft case due to lack of concrete evidence and absence of arrest or charge-sheet against the applicants.

criminal appeal_dismissed anticipatory bail illegal groundwater extraction theft of water non-bailable offence

Inderjeet v. The State (GNCT of Delhi)

05 Feb 2015 · Sunita Gupta · 2015:DHC:10564

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to two senior citizen petitioners accused of harassment and molestation, observing the allegations appeared motivated and imposing conditions to ensure investigation and protection of the complainant.

criminal appeal_allowed anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC harassment molestation