Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Kajal v. Marwah

27 Mar 2014 · V. K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1691

The Delhi High Court upheld conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, holding that the respondent had a legally enforceable debt and failed to repay the cheque amount despite dishonour and notice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act dishonour of cheque legally enforceable debt money lender

Asha Kuwar & Ors. v. Union of India

27 Mar 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1721

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and awarded statutory compensation to the family of a deceased passenger who died due to an untoward incident caused by overcrowding and a passing train, affirming the Railways' strict liability under Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 Railways Act, 1989 Section 124-A untoward incident

K.K. Reddy v. State of NCT of Delhi

27 Mar 2014 · Indermeet Kaur, J. · 2014:DHC:1702

The Delhi High Court upheld the framing of charge under Section 304-A IPC against the Chief Project Engineer for negligence causing death by falling building material.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 304-A IPC negligence rashness framing of charge

Ravinder v. State

26 Mar 2014 · V.K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1663

The Delhi High Court set aside the appellant's conviction under Section 397 IPC for lack of proof of a deadly weapon but upheld conviction under Section 394 IPC for causing injury during robbery.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 397 IPC deadly weapon robbery incised wound

Arun Kumar Arora v. Premshanti Kunj Flat Owners Association

26 Mar 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1674

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking transfer of a civil suit under Section 24 CPC, holding that mere procedural grievances and absence of judicial bias do not justify transfer.

civil petition_dismissed Section 24 CPC transfer of suit bias adjournment

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Badami Devi and Ors.

26 Mar 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1673

The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal, upholding compensation awarded to the deceased employee's mother, holding that the employer-employee relationship existed and that possession of an LMV licence entitled the deceased to drive the three-wheeler involved in the fatal accident.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Employee’s Compensation Act employer-employee relationship driving licence insurance liability

Maruti Sale Trading Co. v. Gurdial Chand Khosla Decd. Thru. Lrs.

26 Mar 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1672

The Delhi High Court allowed restoration of a suit dismissed in default, holding that a party should not suffer for the negligence of their advocate and delay caused thereby can be condoned under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC and Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant restoration of suit Order 9 Rule 9 CPC Section 5 Limitation Act dismissal in default

New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Allahdiya & Ors.

26 Mar 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:1671

The Delhi High Court upheld the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award granting Rs.8,30,900/- compensation with 50% future prospects addition and 50% whole body disability assessment to a TSR driver injured in an accident.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant motor accident claim compensation permanent disability future prospects

BHARTI AXA GENERAL INSRUANCE COMPANY LTD v. HAKIMAN & ORS.

26 Mar 2014 · SURESH KAIT, J. · 2014:DHC:1670

The Delhi High Court upheld the application of multiplier 18 for compensation in a motor accident death claim, affirming that the multiplier is based on the age of the deceased and not the claimants.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant multiplier compensation motor accident claims loss of dependency

Microsoft Corporation & Anr. v. Indus Valley Partners (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

26 Mar 2014 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:1683

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and punitive damages against defendants for unauthorized use of pirated Microsoft software, allowing decree under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC due to defendants' non-appearance.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant copyright infringement software piracy permanent injunction punitive damages

M/S BRENNTAG INGREDIENTS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. v. LAMBDA EASTERN TELECOMMUNICATION LTD

26 Mar 2014 · Vibhu BakhrU, J · 2014:DHC:1682

The Delhi High Court admitted a winding-up petition against a company for non-payment of admitted debts, holding that a belated and unsubstantiated quality dispute was not a bona fide defense to withhold payment.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant winding up petition bona fide dispute Companies Act 1956 debt recovery

Akabuogu Godwinn Ojimma v. Customs

26 Mar 2014 · V. K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1662
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court upheld conviction of three appellants for heroin possession under NDPS Act, affirming chain of custody and admissibility of confessional statements despite minor sample weight discrepancies.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant NDPS Act heroin recovery chain of custody sample tampering

Goodluck Capital (P) Ltd. v. Bihari Forging Pvt. Ltd.

26 Mar 2014 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:1681

The Delhi High Court decreed the plaintiff's suit for recovery of admitted outstanding dues with interest and costs against the defendant who defaulted on payments and failed to contest the suit.

civil appeal_allowed recovery of money admitted liability dishonored cheque Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act

S. Ravinder Singh & Ors. v. Davinder Singh

26 Mar 2014 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:1680

The Delhi High Court held that the later registered Will dated 07.06.2006 supersedes the earlier Will, entitling the plaintiffs and defendant to equal shares in the suit property and granted a preliminary decree for partition.

civil appeal_allowed partition suit registered Will supersession of Will legal heirs

Shankho Mitra and Others v. The State

26 Mar 2014 · G. S. Sistani · 2014:DHC:1679

The Delhi High Court granted Letters of Administration to the petitioners as nearest legal heirs of a missing person after due diligence and public notice under the Indian Succession Act.

civil petition_allowed Letters of Administration Indian Succession Act, 1925 Hindu Succession Act, 1956 missing person

Suresh v. State

26 Mar 2014 · Indermeet Kaur · 2014:DHC:1665

The Delhi High Court reduced the sentence of an appellant convicted under Section 307/34 IPC considering his limited role, simple injuries caused, family responsibilities, and period of incarceration already served, while directing compensation to the victim.

criminal sentence_modified Significant Section 307 IPC attempt to murder sentencing discretion humanitarian grounds

Akabuogu Godwinn Ojimma v. Customs

26 Mar 2014 · V. K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1664
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of three appellants for heroin smuggling, affirming the sufficiency of evidence on baggage ownership, chain of custody, and voluntariness of confessional statements despite minor sample weight discrepancies.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant NDPS Act heroin recovery chain of custody sample tampering

Akabuogu Godwinn Ojimba v. Customs

26 Mar 2014 · V. K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1658
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of three appellants for heroin possession under the NDPS Act, ruling that minor discrepancies in sample weight do not vitiate the case when chain of custody and voluntary confessions are established.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant NDPS Act heroin recovery chain of custody sample tampering

Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd v. Issak Khan & Ors.

26 Mar 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:1677

The Delhi High Court held that the multiplier for loss of dependency compensation must be based on the age of the deceased victim, dismissing the insurance company's appeal against the application of multiplier 18.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant multiplier loss of dependency motor accident claim age of deceased

Sangeeta Bhambani v. Jatinder Sardana & Ors.

26 Mar 2014 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:1676

The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for partition of property held in the name of her maternal uncle, holding that vague claims without pleading a coparcenary or fiduciary relationship are barred by the Benami Act and that pre-deceased daughters cannot transmit coparcenary rights under the Hindu Succession Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant partition suit Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 Hindu Succession Act, 1956 Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005