Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

GURUCHARAN SINGH WASON v. PRAFUL PRAKASH RAMANAND

05 Mar 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:1209

The Delhi High Court held that the Rent Controller has no power to condone delay beyond 15 days in filing leave to defend under Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, dismissing the tenant's challenge but granting reasonable time to vacate the premises.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 25B leave to defend eviction

Ashok Kumar v. State

05 Mar 2014 · Indermeet Kaur · 2014:DHC:1205

The Delhi High Court modified the appellant's conviction from Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC, reducing the sentence based on lack of intent to kill and nature of injuries.

criminal sentence_modified Significant Section 307 IPC Section 326 IPC intention to cause death grievous injuries

Pawan Kumar v. Shiv Chaudhary & Ors.

05 Mar 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:1219

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal for enhancement of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act due to the appellant's failure to show sufficient cause for condonation of a 252-day delay in filing the appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed condonation of delay Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173(1) sufficient cause

Rajeshwari v. Shiv Chaudhary & Ors.

05 Mar 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:1220

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal for enhancement of compensation due to the appellant's failure to show sufficient cause for a 252-day delay in filing the appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

civil appeal_dismissed condonation of delay Section 173(1) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 sufficient cause appeal limitation

Manish Kumar v. Hemlata Sharma

05 Mar 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:1215

The Delhi High Court held that the Rent Controller has no jurisdiction to condone delay beyond 15 days for filing leave to defend under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, upholding eviction but granted the tenant reasonable time to vacate the premises.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) Section 25-B(4) leave to defend

Narender v. State

05 Mar 2014 · V. K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1201

The Delhi High Court upheld robbery and arms possession convictions but set aside abduction with intent to murder charges, reducing sentences accordingly.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant robbery abduction firearms Indian Penal Code

Narender v. State

05 Mar 2014 · V. K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1203

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for armed robbery and firearm possession but reduced sentences, clarifying the scope of abduction and related charges under IPC and Arms Act.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant robbery abduction kidnapping firearm possession

Narender v. State

05 Mar 2014 · V. K. Jain · 2014:DHC:1204

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for robbery with firearms and possession of illegal arms but set aside abduction with intent to murder, reducing sentences accordingly.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant robbery abduction firearms country made pistol

SHRI PHOOL SINGH v. SH. MAMAN & ANR.

05 Mar 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1210

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's regular second appeal in a suit for possession due to failure to prove ownership, upholding the concurrent findings of the lower courts.

civil appeal_dismissed suit for possession ownership Lal Dora ancestral rights

Ram Janam v. State

04 Mar 2014 · Sunil Gaur · 2014:DHC:1195

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of four appellants for armed robbery based on spot arrest and recovery of stolen property and weapons, dismissing their claims of false implication despite minor discrepancies in the complainant's testimony.

criminal appeal_dismissed robbery Section 392 IPC Section 397 IPC Section 25 Arms Act

Ram Janam v. State

04 Mar 2014 · Sunil Gaur · 2014:DHC:1194

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of four appellants for armed robbery based on spot arrest and recovery evidence, dismissing their claims of false implication despite minor discrepancies in the complainant's testimony.

criminal appeal_dismissed robbery Section 392 IPC Section 397 IPC Section 25 Arms Act

Ram Janam v. State

04 Mar 2014 · Sunil Gaur · 2014:DHC:1193

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of four appellants for armed robbery based on spot arrest and recovery, dismissing their appeals despite minor discrepancies in the complainant's testimony.

criminal appeal_dismissed robbery spot arrest recovery of stolen property Section 392 IPC

Director of Income Tax v. The Guru Harkishan Medical Trust

04 Mar 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R. V. Easwar · 2014:DHC:1189-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Management Committee lacked statutory power to create the Guru Harkishan Medical Trust, rendering the trust illegal and ineligible for income tax exemption under Section 12A.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Act, 1971 Section 24 Section 12A Income Tax Act statutory powers

Sh. Pradyot K. Misra v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax and Anr.

04 Mar 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.V. Easwar · 2014:DHC:1192-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed the reassessment notice under Sections 147/148 of the Income Tax Act for lack of tangible material and unreasonable exercise of power, emphasizing that reopening requires a reasonable opinion based on fresh evidence.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 147 Section 148 Reassessment

Shamshad v. State

04 Mar 2014 · S.P. Garg · 2014:DHC:1165

The Delhi High Court acquitted appellants Shaqueel and Shamshad of dacoity charges due to inconsistencies in prosecution evidence and extended the benefit of doubt following the acquittal of co-accused.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dacoity Sections 395/397 IPC benefit of doubt recovery of cash

YAHOO INC. v. FIROZ NADIAWALA & ORS

04 Mar 2014 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:1190

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction restraining defendants from using the well-known trademark "YAHOO" as a film title, holding it infringed and passed off the plaintiff's registered mark.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Passing off Well-known trademark Permanent injunction

Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. v. Hari Om Maheshwari

04 Mar 2014 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA · 2014:DHC:1161-DB

The Delhi High Court modified a compromise decree to remove the bank guarantee condition, directing payment to the plaintiff where the respondent failed to initiate arbitration as mandated, enabling enforcement of the decree.

civil appeal_allowed Significant compromise decree bank guarantee arbitration lien

Jeevan Dass v. Anil Sharma

04 Mar 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:1162-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld equitable partition of residential premises held in permissive possession by family members without title but denied partition or share in the business absent proof of joint family business.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant partition permissive possession joint family business temple trust property

Jeevan Dass v. Anil Sharma

04 Mar 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:1163-DB

The Delhi High Court affirmed equitable partition of residential premises held by permissive family occupation but denied partition or share in a business takhat absent proof of joint family business or title.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant partition permissive possession family arrangement business takhat

Deepak Khosla v. High Court of Delhi

04 Mar 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2012 ILR 5 Delhi 117

The Delhi High Court held that its inherent power to regulate vexatious litigation and impose costs is subject to statutory limits and that judicial orders of the High Court cannot be challenged under writ jurisdiction bypassing appellate remedies.

civil petition_dismissed Significant inherent powers vexatious litigation costs Section 35-A CPC