Delhi High Court

93,075 judgments

Year:

Rishi Khurana v. State NCT of Delhi

14 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:359

The Delhi High Court granted bail to petitioners in a criminal case arising from a settled dispute, subject to cooperation with investigation and compliance with bail conditions.

criminal bail_granted bail FIR quashing compromise investigation

Rishi Khurana v. State NCT of Delhi; Baldev Raj Khurana v. State NCT of Delhi

14 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:358

The Delhi High Court granted interim bail to accused petitioners in a criminal case based on an amicable compromise and nearing completion of investigation, subject to conditions and liberty to complainant to revoke bail if compromise fails.

criminal bail_granted bail compromise interim bail investigation

Sanjeev Kumar v. State

14 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:357

The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of the petitioner accused under Sections 420/34 IPC, holding that bail cannot be granted where there is a risk of tampering with evidence and the petitioner’s role is significant, despite co-accused being granted bail.

criminal appeal_dismissed bail Section 420 IPC Section 34 IPC service provider

M/S Bindal Exports & Imports v. Manik Gupta

14 Jan 2015 · V.K. Shali, J. · 2015:DHC:356

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal, holding that the suit for mandatory injunction was not barred by limitation as the cause of action was continuous and concurrent factual findings by lower courts cannot be disturbed in a second appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed mandatory injunction cause of action limitation concurrent findings

Commissioner of Income Tax-II v. Lalit Kumar Poddar

14 Jan 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:355-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that losses from intraday share trading are not automatically speculative and interest-free loans cannot be added under Section 68 if creditors' identity and creditworthiness are established, remanding the loss issue for fresh consideration.

tax appeal_partly_allowed Significant intraday trading speculative loss Section 73(1) interest-free loans

Col. Devender Singh Solanki v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

14 Jan 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:354

The Delhi High Court directed the government to expeditiously dispose of the petitioner's pending representations challenging the rejection of an alternative plot allotment based on corrected property ownership facts.

administrative other writ petition alternative plot allotment land acquisition representation disposal

Kusum Sharma v. Mahinder Kumar Sharma

14 Jan 2015 · J.R. Midha · 2015:DHC:397

The Delhi High Court mandated comprehensive financial disclosure affidavits by parties at the outset of matrimonial litigation to ensure truthful income disclosure, expedite maintenance proceedings, and uphold justice.

family appeal_allowed Significant maintenance pendente lite Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 affidavit of assets and income Section 24 Hindu Marriage Act

Prosenjeet Banerjee v. Leena Baretto

14 Jan 2015 · Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:352

The High Court held that a domestic servant allowed to reside gratuitously cannot claim any right in the premises and a plaint disclosing no cause of action on this ground is liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 7 Rule 11 CPC cause of action domestic servant gratuitous occupation

Santosh Devi v. Ombir Singh & Anr

14 Jan 2015 · Mukta Gupta, J · 2015:DHC:351

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the trial court's dismissal of a suit for possession and injunction under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove illegal dispossession and had no legal title over government-acquired land.

civil appeal_dismissed Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 6 possession illegal dispossession

Harpreet Singh v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

14 Jan 2015 · Ved Prakash Vaish · 2015:DHC:349

The Delhi High Court held that a complaint under Section 138 NI Act must be returned to the appropriate court if it has not reached the stage of Section 145(2), affirming territorial jurisdiction principles from Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 145(2) NI Act territorial jurisdiction dishonoured cheque

FOUNDATION FOR APPLIED RESEARCH IN CANCER v. DDA

14 Jan 2015 · SURESH KAIT · 2015:DHC:348

The Delhi High Court held that a clarificatory Notification exempting certain institutions from additional FAR charges operates retrospectively, entitling similarly situated petitioners to refunds despite prior finalization of their cases.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Floor Area Ratio (FAR) clarificatory Notification retrospective effect doctrine of parity

Mukesh Aggarwal v. Atul Gupta & Anr

14 Jan 2015 · Deepa Sharma · 2015:DHC:371

The Delhi High Court held that mere suspicion of bias does not amount to de jure inability under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act and dismissed the petition seeking termination of the arbitrator's mandate.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 14 de jure inability arbitrator challenge

Mobin Khan v. Ms Mobina Khan

14 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:363

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking to summon police officers as witnesses to prove an unrelated inquiry report, holding that such evidence was irrelevant in domestic violence proceedings.

family petition_dismissed Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Inquiry Report Summoning witnesses Relevance of evidence

Customs v. Badri Prasad

14 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:364

The High Court allowed the petition to reopen prosecution evidence and directed examination of an essential witness to ensure a just trial in a serious criminal case.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant prosecution evidence essential witness closure of evidence fair trial

Jaideep Singh Bhatia & Anr. v. Orchid Overseas P. Ltd.

14 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:365

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition and upheld the condonation of a 12-day delay in filing a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, accepting the explanation of the complainant's representative's leave and filing immediately after court vacations.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act condonation of delay complaint filing summer vacations

Laxmeshwar Jha v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

14 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:366

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC in a matrimonial dispute following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, emphasizing that continuation of criminal proceedings would be futile.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Satish Sharma v. Ved Prakash & Ors.

14 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:367

The High Court declined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings when an alternate efficacious remedy was available before the trial court.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. inherent jurisdiction alternate remedy quashing petition

Gaurav Garg & Ors. v. The State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

14 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:368

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute based on an amicable settlement between the parties, emphasizing that continuation of criminal proceedings would be futile.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Vikas Yadav & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

14 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:369

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC read with the Dowry Prohibition Act following an amicable settlement and mutual divorce, holding that continuation of proceedings would be futile.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC Dowry Prohibition Act amicable settlement

Praveen Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

14 Jan 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:381

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging a temporary posting order issued under administrative exigencies, holding such postings lawful absent mala fide or statutory violation and emphasizing the employee’s duty to report for work.

administrative petition_dismissed temporary posting transfer policy administrative exigencies Supplementary Rule 114