Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

National Insurance Company Ltd v. Shri Nand Lal & Ors

03 Apr 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:1902

The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurance company’s appeal against a motor accident compensation award, holding that vague reports and failure to prove a fake driving licence or pursue procedural remedies do not justify recovery rights.

civil appeal_dismissed driving licence fake licence Motor Accident Claims Tribunal insurance company

Suman Kumari & Ors. v. Dharambir Singh & Anr

03 Apr 2014 · Suresh Kait, J. · 2014:DHC:1913

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal to enhance compensation in a motor accident claim by increasing future prospects to 50% and awarding higher non-pecuniary damages, while condoning delay in filing the appeal.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation enhancement future prospects loss of love and affection

The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Kanchan Seth and Ors.

03 Apr 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:1911

The Delhi High Court held that an insurer remains liable to pay compensation to third parties despite dishonour of premium cheque and cancellation of policy, and enhanced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant insurance liability dishonoured cheque motor accident claim compensation enhancement

Pramod Arora v. Lt. Governor of Delhi and Ors.

03 Apr 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.V. Easwar · 2014:DHC:1887-DB

The Delhi High Court held that children with disabilities have a distinct right to inclusive education under the PWD Act that cannot be diluted by amendments to the RTE Act or administrative orders, directing the State to establish mechanisms ensuring their effective admission and integration in schools.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant children with special needs Right to Education Act, 2009 Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 inclusive education

Shankar Lal @ Shankar v. State (NCT of Delhi)

03 Apr 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; G.P. Mittal · 2014:DHC:1891-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Shankar Lal for murder based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence, medical findings, and recovery of incriminating material, dismissing his appeal.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence murder Section 302 IPC cause of death

Gurdeep Singh v. State

03 Apr 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; G. P. Mittal · 2014:DHC:1900-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction for murder based on credible eyewitness and dying declaration evidence, corroborated by weapon recovery and medical reports.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 302 IPC murder dying declaration Section 27 Evidence Act

Satya Gupta v. Guneet Singh

03 Apr 2014 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:1910

The Delhi High Court held that purchase of half share by a tenant does not extinguish tenancy rights in the entire property, directing partition by sale subject to tenancy rights.

civil appeal_allowed Significant partition suit tenancy rights co-ownership Transfer of Property Act 1882

Mohd. Akhtar v. The State

03 Apr 2014 · V.K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1896

The Delhi High Court set aside the conviction under Section 308 IPC due to insufficient proof of intent to cause death and convicted the appellant under Section 323 IPC for simple injuries, granting probation with compensation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 308 IPC Section 323 IPC palta as weapon injury caused

Brijesh Kumar Gupta v. Narcotics Control Bureau

03 Apr 2014 · V.K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1895
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act, ruling that Section 50 safeguards apply only to personal searches, absence of public witnesses does not vitiate credible official testimony, and seizures in public places fall under Section 43 of the Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant NDPS Act Section 50 NDPS Search and seizure Public witnesses

Rakesh v. State

03 Apr 2014 · V.K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1894

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for forcible dispossession and wrongful confinement of a tenant, granting probation subject to compensation and good conduct bonds following a civil compromise.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant criminal trespass forcible dispossession tenant rights Section 452 IPC

Rakesh v. State

03 Apr 2014 · V.K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1893

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for forcible dispossession of a tenant but granted probation subject to compensation and good conduct bonds following a compromise between parties.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant forcible dispossession criminal trespass tenant rights IPC Sections 365, 448, 452, 506, 380, 342, 34

Rakesh v. State

03 Apr 2014 · V.K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1892

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for forcible dispossession and wrongful confinement of a tenant, granting probation subject to compensation and good conduct bonds following a civil compromise.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant forcible dispossession criminal trespass wrongful confinement Section 452 IPC

National Insurance Co Ltd v. Yasmin

03 Apr 2014 · Suresh Kait, J. · 2014:DHC:1909

The Delhi High Court upheld the motor accident claim award assessing the deceased's income as per Minimum Wages Act and allowing 30% future prospects addition, dismissing the insurer's appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant compensation motor accident claim Minimum Wages Act future prospects

Vikas @ Johny v. State

03 Apr 2014 · S. P. Garg · 2014:DHC:1898

The Delhi High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for attempt to murder under Section 307/34 IPC but modified the sentence to the period already served and directed payment of compensation to the victim.

criminal appeal_allowed Section 307 IPC Attempt to murder Sentence modification Mitigating circumstances

M/S BACO METALLICS INDUSTRIES v. M/S ZETA LEATHERS EXPORTS & ANR.

03 Apr 2014 · Ved Prakash Vaish · 2014:DHC:1888

Delhi High Court held that Delhi courts have territorial jurisdiction to try a cheque dishonour complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act where the cheque was presented and dishonoured through Delhi clearing and notice was served from Delhi.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act territorial jurisdiction cheque dishonour Section 482 CrPC

Ex.Const. Ram Kumar v. UOI & Anr.

03 Apr 2014 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Jayant Nath · 2014:DHC:1886-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the finding of guilt against a BSF constable for intoxication but set aside his dismissal as disproportionate, directing reinstatement with partial back wages.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Summary Security Force Court BSF Rules 1969 intoxication disciplinary proceedings

Peeyush Agarwal v. Sanjiv Bhavnani & Ors.

03 Apr 2014 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Jayant Nath · 2014:DHC:1885-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal, holding that shares held in trust are judicially recognizable despite Section 153 of the Companies Act, 1956, and that the Benami Transactions Act does not apply where no consideration is paid, thereby restoring the suit for adjudication on merits.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 153 Companies Act 1956 Benami Transactions Prohibition Act 1988 trust shares parking shares

Aditya Nashier v. CBI

03 Apr 2014 · Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:1917

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash charges against a Junior Engineer accused of forgery and corruption, holding that framing of charges requires specific material and that interference at an advanced trial stage is inappropriate.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant framing of charge Section 482 CrPC Prevention of Corruption Act Junior Engineer Site vs Plant

Ashok Kumar Sarna v. Aman Gupta

03 Apr 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:1918

The Delhi High Court upheld an eviction order under the Rent Control Act, holding that bona fide need must be tested based on immediate circumstances and that the landlord is the best judge of property use.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act eviction bona fide requirement leave to defend

Sahil v. State

02 Apr 2014 · S.P. Garg · 2014:DHC:1847

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for armed robbery and causing hurt, holding that mere possession of a deadly weapon during robbery suffices under Section 398 IPC, and reliable testimony of victims can sustain conviction even without independent corroboration.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant robbery deadly weapon Section 398 IPC Arms Act