Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Mohd. Saleem & Ors. v. The State (Govt. of NCT Delhi)

24 Feb 2014 · S.P. Garg · 2014:DHC:1021

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of three brothers for attempt to murder with common intention but modified the sentences of two appellants considering their lesser role and clean antecedents.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant common intention attempt to murder house trespass Section 307 IPC

Faisal v. State

24 Feb 2014 · S.P. Garg · 2014:DHC:1022

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellant for attempt to murder based on eyewitness and medical evidence, rejecting the appeal and refusing leniency.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 307 IPC attempt to murder common intention eyewitness testimony

M. Narsimhan v. State

24 Feb 2014 · S. P. Garg · 2014:DHC:1020

The Delhi High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for robbery under Section 392 IPC but modified the sentence considering the substantial period already served and the appellant's poor economic condition.

criminal appeal_dismissed robbery Section 392 IPC identification sentence modification

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. CHHOTE LAL & ORS.

24 Feb 2014 · SURESH KAIT, J. · 2014:DHC:1023

The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal and upheld compensation awarded to a rickshaw puller injured due to rash and negligent driving of a vehicle, relying on credible eyewitness and medical evidence.

civil appeal_dismissed motor accident claim rash and negligent driving compensation eyewitness testimony

L.A. Appeal Nos. 213/2013 & 215/2013

24 Feb 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1028

The Delhi High Court upheld enhanced compensation for land acquisition based on land categorization and market value, applying principles from a prior judgment to ensure fair compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

property appeal_allowed Significant land acquisition compensation enhancement land categorization fair market value

Employee State Insurance Corporation v. Bawa Inn

24 Feb 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1026

The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of interest and penalty demands under the ESI Act due to a bona fide legal dispute over the meaning of 'use of power' and allowed waiver under Regulation 31C(c).

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 Regulation 31C interest and penalty delayed payment

Ghanshyam Bhagwan Aayeer v. State

24 Feb 2014 · Sunil Gaur · 2014:DHC:1040

The Delhi High Court set aside the summoning order in a defamation complaint against company directors, directing the trial court to reconsider their summons after proper prima facie scrutiny and mandatory inquiry under Section 202 CrPC.

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

All India Institute of Medical Sciences v. Ram Kishore

21 Feb 2014 · Gita Mittal; Deepa Sharma · 2014:DHC:1005-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order setting aside a disciplinary enquiry report and penalty imposed without evidence, emphasizing that statements seeking leniency do not constitute admission of guilt.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings enquiry report admission of guilt CCS Conduct Rules 1964

REVELL GMBH & CO. KG v. M/s FORE SQUARE RETAIL PRIVATE LTD

21 Feb 2014 · Vibhu BakhrU, J · 2014:DHC:978

The Delhi High Court admitted the winding up petition against a company that disputed payment on the ground of defective goods, holding the dispute to be a sham and the debt due and payable.

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

Sushila v. Rajesh Bhatia & Ors.

21 Feb 2014 · Suresh Kait · 2014:DHC:971

The Delhi High Court allowed the appellant’s appeal in a motor accident claim by rejecting contributory negligence and enhancing compensation based on credible evidence.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim contributory negligence compensation enhancement attendant charges

AT & T Communication Services India (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax-I & Anr.

21 Feb 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R. V. Easwar · 2014:DHC:979-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a special audit order under Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, holding that the Assessing Officer's discretion based on account complexity and the procedural safeguards of natural justice were duly observed.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Section 142(2A) Income Tax Act special audit complexity of accounts natural justice

State v. Sanjay Kumar Valmiki

21 Feb 2014 · S. Muralidhar; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:983

The Delhi High Court set aside the conviction and death sentence for rape and murder due to denial of effective legal representation and ordered a retrial to ensure a fair trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant right to fair trial right to legal representation amicus curiae retrial

Alex Jewellery Pvt Ltd & Ors v. Rolex SA

21 Feb 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed, ACJ; Siddharth Mridul, J · 2014:DHC:1000-DB

The Delhi High Court held that an order refusing to reopen ex parte proceedings under Order IX Rule 7 CPC is interlocutory and not appealable under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, dismissing the appeal for lack of maintainability.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order IX Rule 7 CPC ex parte proceedings appealability Section 10 Delhi High Court Act

Lt. Col. Munishwar Dev Bakshi v. Parshottam Dass Bakshi & Ors.

21 Feb 2014 · Kailash Gambhir · 2014:DHC:1001

The Delhi High Court upheld a consent order in a partition suit, ruling that a compromise signed by a party's authorized advocate is binding and dismissed the review application challenging it.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant consent order compromise decree review application recognized agent

Seritec Electronics Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S. Computer Peripheral Solutions

21 Feb 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:1002

The Delhi High Court held that a suit instituted by a principal officer of a company is valid under Order 29 Rule 1 CPC despite failure to prove authorization by all directors, and upheld the plaintiff's claim for recovery of unpaid dues due to the defendant's failure to prove payment.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 29 Rule 1 CPC valid institution of suit burden of proof signature verification

Vijay Lakshmi & Ors. v. Ravinder Seth

21 Feb 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:998

The Delhi High Court held that a daughter-in-law has no right to reside in a property exclusively owned by her mother-in-law as it does not constitute a 'shared household' under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and dismissed the appeal challenging possession proceedings.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Domestic Violence Act, 2005 shared household daughter-in-law residence rights Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988

Prem Chand v. Ram Nath Deceased Through LRs

21 Feb 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:999

The Delhi High Court held that a Hindu female's life estate granted by Will converts into full ownership under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, entitling her legal heirs to inherit the property, overruling earlier restrictive precedent.

property appeal_allowed Significant Hindu Succession Act, 1956 Section 14(1) life estate full ownership

Pacific India Trade Concern v. Commissioner of Customs (Prev)

21 Feb 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R. V. Easwar · 2014:DHC:1003-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against confiscation and penalty for failure to affix MRP stickers on imported packaged goods, holding that such non-compliance attracts confiscation under the Customs Act despite payment of duty.

customs appeal_dismissed Customs Act MRP declaration Confiscation Penalty

Lt.COL.B.M.KHOSLA v. COL.S.K.KHOSLA (RETD.) & ORS

21 Feb 2014 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Jayant Nath · 2014:DHC:967-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's appeal challenging the partition decree and sale of properties, affirming the finality of the decree and rejecting claims of HUF ownership and invalid wills.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant partition suit final decree preliminary decree Indian Stamp Act, 1899

Ashok Sehgal & Anr v. Subhash Chandra Sharma

21 Feb 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:968

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of tenants on the landlord's bona fide requirement for personal use of a commercial shop, emphasizing limited revisional jurisdiction and the need for tenants to raise prima facie triable issues to defend eviction.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 eviction bona fide requirement leave to defend