Delhi High Court

92,849 judgments

Year:

Chatur Singh v. State

26 Sep 2014 · Ved Prakash Vaish · 2014:DHC:5072

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking quashing of an FIR under multiple IPC sections, holding that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. must be exercised sparingly and not to short-circuit prosecution where cognizable offences are disclosed.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR inherent powers settlement agreement

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. v. The Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

26 Sep 2014 · Ved Prakash Vaish · 2014:DHC:5071

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition directing retesting of insecticide samples by the Central Insecticides Laboratory, emphasizing the statutory right to controvert the initial report under the Insecticides Act, 1968.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Insecticides Act, 1968 Section 24(3) Section 24(4) Central Insecticides Laboratory

Union of India v. R.V. Yadav

26 Sep 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vipin Sanghi · 2014:DHC:5067-DB

The Delhi High Court held that procedural irregularities in disciplinary proceedings require remand to the stage of irregularity with opportunity to the charged officer, not outright quashing of the penalty.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant disciplinary proceedings natural justice procedural irregularity Central Civil Services Rules

M/S H M INDUSTRIES v. COMMISSIONER OF VALUE ADDES TAX

26 Sep 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; V. Kameswar Rao · 2014:DHC:5087-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the extended six-year limitation period for default tax assessment under the DVAT Act applies only if the Commissioner records in writing a 'reason to believe' regarding concealment or omission at the time of assessment, and absent such recording, the assessment is barred by limitation.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 Section 34(1) proviso default assessment reason to believe

Vikas Nagwan v. Bitto

26 Sep 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5061
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction order dismissing the tenant's delayed leave to defend application and held that the Rent Controller cannot condone delay beyond the statutory period under the Delhi Rent Control Act.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 leave to defend condonation of delay service of summons

B. Mahesh Sharma v. Union of India & Ors.

26 Sep 2014 · The Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:5036-DB

The Delhi High Court restrained IIPM from using MBA/BBA nomenclature without statutory approval, directed removal of misleading advertisements, and mandated disclosure of its unrecognized status to protect students from deception.

administrative petition_allowed Significant University Grants Commission Act, 1956 AICTE approval MBA degree BBA degree

Saurav & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

26 Sep 2014 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2014:DHC:5039

The Delhi High Court held that the exclusion of selected Taekwondo athletes from the 2014 Asian Games contingent was arbitrary and directed the government to grant them administrative approval and funding for participation.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Article 14 administrative approval Asian Games 2014 Taekwondo athletes

Hari Om Narayan Alloys Private Limited v. Official Liquidator

26 Sep 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:5070

The Delhi High Court sanctioned a Scheme of Amalgamation under the Companies Act, holding that stock exchange consent is not mandatory and sanction does not absolve statutory liabilities.

corporate petition_allowed Significant Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 sections 391 to 394 Stock Exchange consent

Pan India Consultants Private Limited v. Pan India Holdings Private Limited & Ors.

26 Sep 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:5068

The Delhi High Court sanctioned a Scheme of Arrangement under the Companies Act, 1956, dispensing with meetings of Shareholders and Creditors due to unanimous consent and absence of creditors.

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

Times Business Solutions Limited v. Times Internet Limited

26 Sep 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:5075

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between Times Business Solutions Limited and Times Internet Limited under sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956, confirming the vesting of assets and liabilities and dissolution of the Transferor Company without winding up.

corporate petition_allowed Significant Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 sections 391 to 394 Official Liquidator

Baljeet Singh & Anr v. State

26 Sep 2014 · Kailash Gambhir; Sunita Gupta · 2014:DHC:5085-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the convictions of family members for the murder of a daughter-in-law due to failure to bear a male child, relying on circumstantial evidence and credible child witness testimony despite procedural lapses and defence challenges.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant murder child witness circumstantial evidence Section 302 IPC

Mukesh v. Chaman Lal & Ors.

26 Sep 2014 · Jayant Nath · 2014:DHC:5081

Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim involving 73% permanent disability, awarding increased amounts for pain and suffering, loss of expectation of life, attendant charges, and future conveyance.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation enhancement permanent disability pain and suffering

RAM AVTAR SHARMA v. BHARAT SHARMA

26 Sep 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5056

The High Court upheld the trial court's dismissal of the petition seeking condonation of delay and setting aside of an ex parte decree under Order XXXVII CPC due to lack of special circumstances and credible explanation.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order XXXVII CPC ex parte decree condonation of delay setting aside decree

Marico Limited v. Pratik Goyal & Anr.

26 Sep 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:5077

The Delhi High Court upheld the plaintiff's exclusive rights over the trademark 'PARACHUTE' and granted injunction against defendants' use of the deceptively similar mark 'PARALITE', finding trademark infringement, copyright violation, and passing off.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement deceptive similarity passing off copyright infringement

Paramount Plastic Industries v. Corporation Bank

26 Sep 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:5038-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the DRAT has statutory power under Section 17A of the DRT Act to transfer SARFAESI Act appeals/applications between DRTs, including to tribunals lacking territorial jurisdiction over the secured asset.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Section 17 SARFAESI Act Section 17A DRT Act Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal transfer of proceedings

State Bank of India v. M/S Continental Construction Ltd. & Others

26 Sep 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vibhu Bakhru · 2014:DHC:5041-DB

The Delhi High Court held that belated amendments to written statements in RDDB Act proceedings are impermissible when the matter is remanded solely for leading evidence, but pure questions of law may be raised without amendment.

civil petition_allowed Significant Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 Debt Recovery Tribunal amendment of written statement summary procedure

Commissioner of Income Tax-XI v. Rama Krishna Jewellers

26 Sep 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:5050-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the deletion of income tax additions made under Section 68 and disallowance of making charges after finding the assessee's evidence credible and the factual findings by appellate authorities not perverse.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 68 unexplained cash credits making charges disallowance additional evidence on remand

Bharat Singh & Anr v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

26 Sep 2014 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:5076

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes on the basis of an amicable settlement and the complainant's disinterest in prosecution, affirming the High Court's inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to do so in such cases.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR matrimonial disputes Section 498-A IPC

Paramount Plastic Industries v. Corporation Bank

26 Sep 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:5040-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the DRAT’s power under Section 17A of the DRT Act to transfer appeals under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act between DRTs, including to tribunals without territorial jurisdiction over the secured asset.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Section 17A DRT Act SARFAESI Act Section 17 Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal transfer of proceedings

Mir Singh v. Govt of NCT & Ors.

26 Sep 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vipin Sanghi · 2014:DHC:5073-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld a disciplinary censure against a police inspector for negligence in handling time barred cases despite his tenure starting after the cases became barred.

administrative petition_dismissed disciplinary proceedings misconduct negligence time barred cases