Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Vinay Kumar Tyagi v. State of Delhi

06 May 2014 · Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:2393

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for gang rape under Section 376(2)(g) IPC based on credible prosecutrix testimony corroborated by forensic and medical evidence, dismissing claims of false implication.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 376(2)(g) IPC rape prosecutrix testimony forensic evidence

Vinay Kumar Tyagi v. State of Delhi

06 May 2014 · Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:2395

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions under Section 376(2)(g) IPC based on credible prosecutrix testimony corroborated by forensic and medical evidence, dismissing appeals challenging the rape convictions.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant rape Section 376(2)(g) IPC prosecutrix testimony forensic evidence

M/S SHRISTI UDAIPUR HOTELS AND RESROTS (P) LTD v. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED

06 May 2014 · Hima Kohli · 2014:DHC:2394

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that the cause of action arose in Rajasthan and the petition was not maintainable in Delhi despite the respondent's head office being located there.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction cause of action Article 226 forum conveniens

Vinay Kumar Tyagi v. State of Delhi

06 May 2014 · Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:2392

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of three appellants for gang rape under Section 376(2)(g) IPC based on credible prosecutrix testimony corroborated by forensic and medical evidence, dismissing claims of false implication.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant rape Section 376(2)(g) IPC prosecutrix testimony forensic evidence

Deepak Mohan Sethi v. BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd.

06 May 2014 · P.K. Bhasin; J.R. Midha · 2014:DHC:2386-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Employees who accepted voluntary retirement under a VRS and received payment cannot claim retrospective promotion benefits after an inordinate delay, as such claims are barred by delay, laches, and estoppel.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Voluntary Retirement Scheme Time Bound Promotion Scale Delay and Laches Service Law

Bimla Devi & Anr. v. Mohan Singh & Ors.

05 May 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:2376

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by adding 50% towards future prospects and applying a multiplier of 18, awarding just and fair damages to the claimants.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 compensation future prospects multiplier

Kedari Lal Gupta v. CB Singh Raja

05 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2380

The Delhi High Court held that a tenant’s vague and unsubstantiated contentions do not disclose triable issues to oppose eviction where the landlord establishes bona fide need and owns only the disputed premises.

property appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) leave to defend bona fide need

Shiv Anand v. Union of India & Anr.

05 May 2014 · Hima Kohli · 2014:DHC:2379

The Delhi High Court held that Railway licences for PCO booths cannot be extended beyond ten years without fresh bids but allowed temporary continuation on payment of licence fees pending fresh allotment.

administrative petition_dismissed PCO booth allotment Railways Policy Circular 2004 licence renewal fresh bidding

J.S. Arora and Ors. v. State Bank of Hyderabad and Ors.

05 May 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vibhu Bakhru · 2014:DHC:2377-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of SARFAESI Act notices and the bank's recovery rights over mortgaged properties, dismissing the petitioners' claim as innocent purchasers with knowledge of prior mortgages.

civil petition_dismissed Significant SARFAESI Act Section 13(2) notice mortgage third-party purchaser

Moonrise Constructions Private Limited v. Uppal-Chadha Hi-Tech Developers Private Limited

05 May 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:2384

The Delhi High Court sanctioned a Scheme of Amalgamation under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, after ensuring compliance with statutory requirements and absence of objections.

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

Moonrise Constructions Private Limited v. Thyme Town Planners Private Limited

05 May 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:2382

The Delhi High Court sanctioned two Schemes of Amalgamation under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956 after ensuring compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements and absence of objections.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391-394 Official Liquidator

Anand Buildwell Consultants Private Limited & Anr. v. Polym Agencies Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

05 May 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:2381

The Delhi High Court allowed a Scheme of Amalgamation under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956, dispensing with meetings of shareholders and unsecured creditors based on written consents and subject to filing of a supporting Board resolution.

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

Smarttrust Infosolution Private Limited & Another v. Giesecke & Devrient India Private Limited

05 May 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:2385

The Delhi High Court allowed company applications under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956 sanctioning schemes of amalgamation and dispensed with meetings of shareholders and creditors based on requisite consents and corrected typographical errors in the applications.

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

Ramkaran Thr. Parokar Sushila v. State

05 May 2014 · V. K. Jain · 2014:DHC:2358

Delhi High Court acquitted appellants of attempt to cause death under Section 308 IPC but convicted them for voluntarily causing hurt under Section 323 IPC and granted probation considering victim's forgiveness and circumstances.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 308 IPC Section 323 IPC Voluntarily causing hurt Delay in FIR

Wasif v. State

05 May 2014 · Veena Birbal · 2014:DHC:2359

The Delhi High Court upheld the framing of charge under Section 363 IPC against a petitioner who took a 15-year-old minor away without parental consent, holding that guardian consent is paramount in kidnapping cases involving minors.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant kidnapping Section 361 IPC Section 363 IPC minor

SP MANCHANDA v. MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA AND ORS

05 May 2014 · Manmohan · 2014:DHC:2352

The Delhi High Court issued a procedural rule and directed the writ petition involving the Medical Council of India to be listed as a regular matter alongside a related petition.

other other Procedural Writ Petition Medical Council of India Rule issued Regular Matters

Soni Singh v. State

05 May 2014 · V.K. Jain · 2014:DHC:2363

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for assault and obstruction of Excise officers acting in discharge of official duties, emphasizing that bodily pain constitutes hurt under IPC and granting conditional release with compensation.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 186 IPC Section 353 IPC assault on public servant illicit liquor

Alka Gupta v. Medical Council of India and Anr

05 May 2014 · Manmohan · 2014:DHC:2353

The Delhi High Court stayed the MCI's order striking off the petitioner's name pending Supreme Court's final decision on the validity of appeal provisions under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and related regulations.

administrative other Procedural Medical Council of India Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 Clause 8.8 Regulations 2002 Section 24(2)

M/S NAKSHATRA STEEL SALES & SERVICES LTD v. M/S RADLAY METAL PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.

05 May 2014 · Vibhu Bakhru, J · 2014:DHC:2351

Winding up petitions are not maintainable where there is a bona fide dispute over the debt and the company is solvent and willing to pay admitted dues.

corporate petition_dismissed Significant winding up petition Companies Act 1956 section 433(e) section 434

M/S NAKSHATRA STEEL SALES & SERVICES LTD v. M/S RADLAY METAL PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.

05 May 2014 · Vibhu Bakhru, J · 2014:DHC:2354

The Delhi High Court dismissed winding up petitions against a company holding that bona fide disputes over debt and late payment charges preclude a finding of insolvency and winding up under the Companies Act.

corporate appeal_dismissed Significant winding up petition Companies Act 1956 Section 433(e) Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act