Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Ravi v. State

07 Aug 2014 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:3770-DB

The Delhi High Court modified a murder conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder where the accused's reckless act caused a child's death without intention to kill.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant culpable homicide not amounting to murder intention to cause death reckless act Section 302 IPC

Nirmala Devi v. Maharishi Balmiki Mandir

06 Aug 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:3742

The Delhi High Court held that in absence of a second appeal provision under the Delhi Rent Control Act, a petition under Article 227 cannot be treated as a second appeal and upheld the eviction order where the tenant's defence was struck off for non-deposit of interim rent.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 39 deletion second appeal Article 227 Constitution of India

Shree Govind Plastics v. Sonu Prajapati

06 Aug 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:3739

The Delhi High Court upheld the Labour Court's award granting lump-sum compensation to a workman for illegal termination where the management failed to prove voluntary abandonment of service.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant illegal termination workman abandonment lump-sum compensation industrial dispute

Satish Bansal v. City Capital Foundation Limited

06 Aug 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:3738

The Delhi High Court decreed a recovery suit in favor of the Plaintiff for unpaid electrical goods supplied, granting principal and interest after the Defendant failed to appear or contest.

civil appeal_dismissed running account recovery suit substituted service ex parte decree

Saroj Impex Private Limited v. Elina Electrotech Private Limited

06 Aug 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:3736

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between Saroj Impex Private Limited and Elina Electrotech Private Limited under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, subject to compliance with statutory requirements.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394 authorized share capital

Grand Builders Private Limited & Ors. v. Jindal Dyechem Industries Private Limited

06 Aug 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:3735

The Delhi High Court sanctioned a Scheme of Arrangement under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, approving the demerger and transfer of assets and liabilities to the Transferee Company after ensuring statutory compliance and absence of objections.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Arrangement Companies Act 1956 sections 391 to 394 demerger

Splendid Builders Private Limited & Ors. v. Regional Director, Northern Region & Ors.

06 Aug 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:3734

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation under the Companies Act, 1956, holding that prior RBI approval was not mandatory for non-deposit accepting NBFCs and that statutory compliances were satisfactorily addressed.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Reserve Bank of India Non-Banking Finance Company

Yasaki Exports Pvt Ltd v. Core International Ltd

06 Aug 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:3733

The Delhi High Court sanctioned a Scheme of Arrangement for amalgamation of nine private companies with a transferee company under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, after statutory compliance and no objections.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Arrangement Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394

Sea Hawk Resorts Private Limited v. Crystal Guest House Pvt Ltd

06 Aug 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:3732

The Delhi High Court approved a de-merger Scheme under the Companies Act, 1956, dispensing with meetings of shareholders and creditors based on their written consents and payments.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Arrangement De-merger Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394

R.S. Misra v. UOI & Ors

06 Aug 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vipin Sanghi · 2014:DHC:3745-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition directing reconsideration of the petitioner's promotion claim after proper consideration of his representations against adverse service records, applying Supreme Court precedents retrospectively.

administrative petition_allowed Significant promotion Annual Confidential Reports adverse remarks representation

Sunil Bhatia & Ors. v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

06 Aug 2014 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:3744

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute on the basis of a full settlement and mutual consent divorce, applying the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

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

SCB China Ltd v. State Bank of Patiala & Ors.

06 Aug 2014 · Kailash Gambhir; Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:3752-DB

The Delhi High Court held that an order granting leave to defend under Order XXXVII CPC is interlocutory and not appealable under the Letters Patent or Delhi High Court Act, dismissing the appellant's appeal challenging such an order.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXXVII CPC leave to defend appealability Letters Patent

Narender Singh Chaudhary & Ors. v. State & Anr.

06 Aug 2014 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:3746

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes on the basis of a recorded settlement between the parties and the complainant's discontinuance of prosecution.

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

Ramjas College v. Delhi University & College Karamchari Union

06 Aug 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:3743

The Delhi High Court granted a permanent injunction restraining a university employees' union from holding disruptive demonstrations within college premises, affirming that constitutional protest rights do not permit obstruction of institutional functioning.

civil appeal_allowed Significant permanent injunction trade union demonstrations dharnas

PFIZER PRODUCTS, INC v. MITTAL NATHALAL PATEL & ORS.

06 Aug 2014 · G. S. Sistani · 2014:DHC:3753
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and punitive damages to Pfizer for trademark infringement and passing off against defendants marketing 'FILAGRA' deceptively similar to 'VIAGRA'.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Passing off Deceptive similarity Trade dress

Gaurav & Ors. v. State & Anr.

06 Aug 2014 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:3750

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 324, 341, and 34 IPC based on a settlement between parties at the investigation stage, emphasizing the cautious exercise of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in non-compoundable offences.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR non-compoundable offence settlement between parties

Gaurav & Ors. v. State & Anr.

06 Aug 2014 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:3751

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR arising from a neighborhood quarrel under Sections 324/341/34 IPC on the basis of a genuine settlement and compensation, applying the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR non-compoundable offence settlement between parties

CIT v. CNB Finwiz Ltd.

06 Aug 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; V. Kameswar Rao · 2014:DHC:3747-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's ruling that profits from sale of shares held as investments must be assessed as short-term capital gains and not as business income, despite the assessee being a share broker.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant short-term capital gains business income stock-in-trade investment portfolio

DANDI SALT PVT LTD v. UOI & ORS

06 Aug 2014 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2014:DHC:3731
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the Copyright Board has inherent power to review its orders to correct procedural infirmities and directed the Board to consider the petitioner's review application, setting aside the Registrar's rejection.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Copyright Board Review application Condonation of delay Procedural review

Madan Lal Kapur v. Union of India

06 Aug 2014 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2014:DHC:3741

The Delhi High Court upheld the termination of a milk distribution concession on the ground of the concessionaire attaining the maximum age limit prescribed by policy, holding that such termination was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable.

administrative petition_dismissed Delhi Milk Scheme concessionaire termination of concession age limit