Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Future Generali Inida Insurance Co. Ltd v. Sonu Singh Negi & Anr.

25 Feb 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:1063

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's award of compensation for 22% whole body disability to a motor accident victim despite the insurance company's challenge based on the disability being limited to a limb.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant motor accident claim functional disability whole body disability compensation

Utkarsh v. Delhi Bar Association

25 Feb 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:1043

The Delhi High Court held that a suit seeking enforcement of mandatory election provisions in an association's constitution is not barred by arbitration and is maintainable before the court.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitrability mandatory injunction election commission Delhi Bar Association

Const. Subhash Babu v. Union of India & Ors.

25 Feb 2014 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Jayant Nath · 2014:DHC:1044-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and dismissal of a BSF constable for unauthorized absence and assaulting a superior officer, ruling the punishment proportionate to the offences and necessary for maintaining discipline and security.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Border Security Force Rules, 1969 unauthorized absence assault on superior officer disciplinary proceedings

Kaushal Kishor Rai v. Union of India

25 Feb 2014 · Pradeep Nandrajog; R. V. Easwar · 2014:DHC:1045-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed dismissal orders against CRPF personnel for misconduct due to lack of evidence and ordered reinstatement with partial back wages.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant CRPF Act 1949 disciplinary inquiry misconduct unauthorized vehicle use

Kuldeep Balhara v. Manoj Kumar & Anr

25 Feb 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:1047

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a suit for restoration of possession due to the petitioner's failure to prove possession of the disputed property under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act.

civil appeal_dismissed restoration of possession Specific Relief Act Section 6 burden of proof possession

MEX SWITCHGEARS PVT LTD v. MAX SWITCHGEARS PVT LTD

25 Feb 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:1046

The Delhi High Court granted interim injunction restraining defendant's use of deceptively similar trademark 'MAX' and corporate name, holding it infringed plaintiff's registered trademark 'MEX' and amounted to passing off.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Passing off Trade Marks Act 1999 Section 29

Rakhi Devi & Ors. v. Ashok Kumar & Ors.

25 Feb 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:1064

Delhi High Court enhanced motor accident compensation by adding 50% future prospects for a 25-year-old deceased and increased non-pecuniary damages in line with Supreme Court precedents.

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

Ram Niwas Rana & Ors. v. Anil Kumar & Ors.

25 Feb 2014 · Veena Birbal · 2014:DHC:1074

The Delhi High Court upheld probate of a Will executed by Smt. Manno Devi, holding that the scribe of the Will can validly act as an attesting witness under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, and the Will was duly executed and attested.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Indian Succession Act Section 63 Section 68 Evidence Act Will execution

M/S. KOSTUB INVESTMENT LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

25 Feb 2014 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; RAJIV SHAKDHER · 2014:DHC:1049-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court allowed deduction under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act for expenses incurred on the higher education of an employee, holding it was a bona fide business expenditure directly connected to the company's business.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 37 Income Tax Act business expenditure higher education expenses employee training

Mangal Sain @ Monu v. State

25 Feb 2014 · S.P. Garg · 2014:DHC:1053

The Delhi High Court set aside convictions for robbery due to inconsistent victim testimony, unexplained FIR delay, and failure to prove accused involvement beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant robbery identification FIR delay benefit of doubt

Giri Raj v. Sheela Devi

25 Feb 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:1050
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The High Court allowed the tenant's revision petition, setting aside the eviction order for failure to establish bonafide requirement and non-availability of suitable accommodation, and granted leave to defend on triable issues.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) bonafide requirement leave to defend

Jagjeet Kaur v. State

25 Feb 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1067

Court held that court permission under Section 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act is required for sale of a minor's undivided share in co-owned property and allowed the appeal granting such permission with conditions.

family appeal_allowed Significant Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 Section 8 Section 12 minor's property

Poonam v. V.P. Sharma

25 Feb 2014 · Deepa Sharma · 2014:DHC:1071

A divorced wife whose domestic relationship with her ex-husband ended before the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 came into force cannot invoke the Act's provisions against him.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 domestic relationship aggrieved person divorced wife

Dewan Automobiles and Anr. v. M/S. Birla Yamaha Ltd.

25 Feb 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1070

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decree for recovery based on admitted documents and statement of accounts despite absence of invoices or direct witness employment.

civil appeal_dismissed Regular Second Appeal Section 100 CPC statement of account admission

Disney Enterprises, Inc & Anr v. Dhiraj & Anr

25 Feb 2014 · G. S. Sistani · 2014:DHC:1073

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and damages to Disney against defendants selling bags bearing its copyrighted and trademarked characters without authorization, emphasizing punitive damages to deter infringement.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement copyright infringement permanent injunction passing off

Raman Narula v. The Director of Enforcement

25 Feb 2014 · S. Muralidhar · 2014:DHC:1065

Delhi High Court set aside penalties imposed under FERA on Mr. Narula and Club Med India, holding that branch office liability under Section 68 FERA was not established and the corrigendum altering the adjudication order was illegal.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 Section 68 FERA Section 65 FERA Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999

CIT v. UNIWORD TELECOM LTD.

25 Feb 2014 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; R.V. EASWAR · 2014:DHC:1072-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's partial disallowance of bogus purchases and allowed the assessee's claim under the retrospective amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) for TDS deduction, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant bogus purchases disallowance books of accounts Section 40(a)(ia)

Logix Infosoft Private Ltd. v. CB Richard Ellis South Asia Private Limited

25 Feb 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1066

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging service of summons at the registered office, holding that mere oral claims of address change without documentary proof do not invalidate service under Order 29 Rule 2 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed service of summons registered office Order 9 Rule 13 CPC Order 29 Rule 2 CPC

Satya Kumar v. Sumitra Devi and Ors.

25 Feb 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1068

The Delhi High Court upheld the imposition of penalty on the employer for delay in informing the insurer about an accident, directing insurer to pay interest and allowing employer to recover penalty from insurer if policy covers it.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 Section 4A penalty for delay insurance company liability

Ghanshyam Bhagwan Aayeer v. State

24 Feb 2014 · Sunil Gaur · 2014:DHC:1042

The Delhi High Court set aside the summoning order in a defamation complaint against company directors and the company, directing the trial court to reconsider the order applying proper legal principles regarding prima facie offence and territorial jurisdiction.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant defamation summoning order Section 500 IPC Section 501 IPC