Delhi High Court

98,981 judgments

Year:

PEPSI FOODS LTD. v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

26 Apr 2013 · BADAR DURREZ AHMED; VIBHU BAKHRU · 2013:DHC:7204-DB

The Delhi High Court restrained tax authorities from taking coercive action under Section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act until the ITAT disposes of the petitioner’s pending stay applications, directing expeditious hearing.

tax petition_allowed Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 221(1) writ petition stay application

Harleen Kaur Anand v. M/S Omaxe Ltd & Anr

26 Apr 2013 · Manmohan Singh · 2013:DHC:8109

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator with fees shared equally by parties upon their consent to adjudicate their disputes.

civil petition_allowed arbitration sole arbitrator appointment of arbitrator arbitrator's fee

Revenue v. Supreme Polypropolene Pvt. Ltd.

26 Apr 2013 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R. V. Easwar · 2013:DHC:2110-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revenue's review petition, holding that reopening of assessment under section 147 is invalid without reasons recorded supported by material forming part of the assessment record.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 147 Section 148 Reassessment

Bansal Agrotech Pvt Ltd v. DDA

26 Apr 2013 · V.K. Jain · 2013:DHC:2090

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging DDA's removal of unauthorized construction in a common service bay area, holding that the petitioner had no legal right to construct there as it was not sold to them.

property petition_dismissed common area service bay unauthorized construction Delhi Development Authority

Union of India v. Lalit Kumar

26 Apr 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:2100-DB

The Delhi High Court held that in emergent medical cases, medical reimbursement claims can be reasonably reduced by competent authorities and set aside a tribunal order denying such discretion, directing full payment of the claim.

administrative petition_allowed Significant medical reimbursement emergency medical treatment CGHS rates natural justice

Rudra Pratap Naryan Singh (HUF) v. Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd & Anr

26 Apr 2013 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J · 2013:DHC:2099

The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for possession of a flat based on a cancelled agreement to sell and an unchallenged relinquishment deed, emphasizing the necessity of specific performance suits and diligent prosecution.

civil appeal_dismissed agreement to sell possession relinquishment deed specific performance

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Miss Ramnika & Ors.

26 Apr 2013 · J. R. Midha · 2013:DHC:2098

The Delhi High Court held that an insurer must initially pay compensation to a motor accident victim even if the driver lacked a valid licence, with a right to recover the amount from the driver and owner thereafter.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim insurance liability invalid driving licence compensation payment

Union of India and Ors. v. Doly Loyi

26 Apr 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:2102-DB

The Delhi High Court held that mere sanction for prosecution does not justify withholding promotion under the sealed cover procedure; prosecution must be pending with charge sheet filed and cognizance taken for the procedure to apply.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant sealed cover procedure promotion withholding sanction for prosecution pending prosecution

Ravinder Chaddha v. State NCT of Delhi

26 Apr 2013 · P.K. Bhasin · 2013:DHC:2083

The Delhi High Court held that interlocutory orders taking cognizance of offences can be corrected for inadvertent omissions before charge framing, and discharge of an accused requires an express order at the charge stage.

criminal other Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 cognizance discharge of accused interlocutory order

Ashok Kumar & Anr v. SBI Officers Association (Delhi Circle) & Anr

26 Apr 2013 · Manmohan Singh, J. · 2013:DHC:2087

The Delhi High Court held that disputes relating to disciplinary action and election in an association fall outside the arbitration clause and must follow specific internal remedies, dismissing interim relief petitions under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act.

other petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 9 Bye laws Disciplinary action

New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Pooja Bhatia & Ors.

26 Apr 2013 · Suresh Kait · 2013:DHC:2084

The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal, upholding the motor accident compensation award and additionally granted damages for loss of love and affection to the deceased's dependents.

motor_accident_claims appeal_dismissed Significant motor accident claim negligence compensation future prospects

Sanjay Kumar Singh & Anr v. Cosmos Infra Engineering (India) Ltd

26 Apr 2013 · Manmohan Singh · 2013:DHC:2111

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate disputes arising from a sub-lease agreement despite the respondent's claim of contract termination.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(5) arbitration agreement appointment of arbitrator

Krishan Kumar Nath v. Sohan Brahm Nath

26 Apr 2013 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2013:DHC:2109

The Delhi High Court held that in a compromise decree involving reciprocal promises, payment need not be tendered unless the other party is ready to perform, dismissing objections to execution as abuse of process and directing enforcement with costs and potential penal action under Section 74 CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant compromise decree partition suit reciprocal promises Section 51 Indian Contract Act

Union of India v. Vijender Singh; Union of India v. Sh. Laxman Prasad; Union of India v. Ashok Kumar

26 Apr 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:2104-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the Casual Labour (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme, 1993 applies only to Group 'D' casual labourers and denied temporary status and regularization to contract workers engaged in Group 'C' posts.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Temporary Status Scheme 1993 Group C and Group D posts Casual labourers Regularization of employment

Union of India v. Vijender Singh; Union of India v. Sh. Laxman Prasad; Union of India v. Ashok Kumar

26 Apr 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:2103-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the Casual Labour Scheme, 1993, applies only to Group 'D' casual labourers and denied temporary status and regularization to contract Motor Lowry Drivers categorized as Group 'C' employees, setting aside the Tribunal's contrary orders.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Temporary Status Scheme 1993 Casual Labour Group C employees Group D employees

Union of India v. Vijender Singh; Union of India v. Sh. Laxman Prasad; Union of India v. Ashok Kumar

26 Apr 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:2101-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the Temporary Status Scheme, 1993 applies only to Group 'D' casual labourers and contract workers engaged in Group 'C' posts are not entitled to temporary status or regularization under this Scheme.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Temporary Status Scheme 1993 Group C posts Group D posts Contract labour

Ramraj v. State (NCT of Delhi)

26 Apr 2013 · S.P. Garg · 2013:DHC:2086

The Delhi High Court dismissed the criminal appeal of Ramraj by referring to a detailed common judgment delivered in a related case on the same day.

criminal appeal_dismissed criminal appeal conviction dismissal Delhi High Court

Sarfu v. State (NCT of Delhi)

26 Apr 2013 · S. P. Garg · 2013:DHC:2085

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of appellants for robbery under Section 394/34 IPC, emphasizing the reliability of the injured victim's testimony and drawing adverse inference from the accused's refusal to participate in Test Identification Parade.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant robbery injured witness test identification parade Section 394 IPC

Commissioner of Income Tax-II v. Living Media India Ltd

26 Apr 2013 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Vibhu Bakhru · 2013:DHC:2107-DB
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment under Section 147/148 is invalid if based on reasons recorded after issuance of the Section 148 notice or without valid material, thereby quashing the reassessment order.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 147 Section 148 Reopening of assessment

International College of Financial Planning Ltd v. Kanwaljeet Kaur Kochar

25 Apr 2013 · A.K. Pathak · 2013:DHC:8543

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court’s award of mesne profits and damages against a tenant who failed to vacate leased premises and caused extensive damage beyond permitted renovations.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant mesne profits lease termination market rent damages for property