Delhi High Court
29,724 judgments
Capt. Gurdeep Singh Tiwana & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that writ petitions against Air India Limited are not maintainable post-privatization as it ceases to be a 'Public Authority' under Article 12, dismissing the petitions while allowing the claimants to seek remedies in appropriate forums.
Shiwang Tripathi & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that apprentices without a contractual obligation for employment under Section 22(2) of the Apprentices Act, 1961, have no right to absorption as regular employees, and non-absorption does not amount to discrimination.
M. A. Ansari v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed pensionary benefits to a dismissed Air Force personnel recognizing his long service and exceptional circumstances despite statutory bar on pension post dismissal.
Prabhat Das v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court set aside disciplinary penalty imposed on a CISF constable for non-disclosure of arrest, holding that police intimation and acquittal negate the charge of concealment.
Asif Sammi v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of the accused in a murder case, holding the dying declaration reliable and supported by corroborative evidence, and emphasizing the seriousness of the offence and risk of witness tampering.
IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD v. SATISH CHANDER MADHOK & ORS
The Delhi High Court upheld a motor accident compensation award of over Rs. 10 lakh, affirming that just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act can be based on credible oral and documentary evidence and rejecting insurer's challenge to various heads of damages.
G.D. Memorial Homoeopathic Medical College & Hospital v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court remanded the matter for fresh consideration after holding that the petitioner-institution was denied a fair opportunity of hearing and inspection report before adverse decisions on its intake capacity were taken under the National Commission for Homeopathy Act, 2020.
Mangla Kamla Homoeopathic Medical College & Hospital v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court set aside the denial of admission permission to a homoeopathic college for failure to provide the inspection report and opportunity of hearing, emphasizing adherence to natural justice.
Ved Yadav v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that convicts injured during prison labor are entitled to just compensation and medical treatment, including functional prosthesis, and directed the establishment of a committee to assess and award such relief.
Homeopathic Medical College, Abohar v. Union of India Ministry of Ayush
The Delhi High Court quashed denial orders for BHMS course permission due to lack of inspection report and personal hearing, remanding the matter for fresh consideration in compliance with natural justice.
Riptinder Jit Singh v. Air India Limited
The Delhi High Court held that writ petitions against Air India Limited are not maintainable post-privatization as it ceases to be a public authority under Article 12, but assured liability remains enforceable in appropriate forums.
Anshul Gupta v. Ajay Gupta
The Delhi High Court quashed a trial court order listing a suit for final hearing without considering the defendant's applications to enter appearance and condone delay, holding that such omission violates natural justice.
Bhim Singh v. Rajiv Gupta & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a suit properly valued for pecuniary jurisdiction requires payment of court fees on the same valuation and remanded the suit for adjudication after allowing the plaintiff to pay deficient court fees.
Manoj Kumari Shukla and Another v. Amol Garg
The Delhi High Court allowed delayed filing of written statement in a civil suit, emphasizing adjudication on merits over procedural technicalities, subject to payment of costs.
Akhilesh Singh v. Airports Authority of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the Airports Authority of India to decide the petitioner's pending representation within four weeks by passing a reasoned order, without adjudicating on the merits.
282660399f2afb2711e4916999547f04db27e5ea80e894e5c69bb509816aaff7
The Supreme Court upheld the murder conviction under Section 302 IPC based on complete circumstantial evidence and the doctrine of common intention, dismissing the accused's appeal.
1cd1497c2ff2c4f471182c84c1444464fb35700e0b5094f00e374dae7582d424
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction and death sentence for murder, affirming the application of Section 106 Indian Evidence Act and the principle of common intention under Section 34 IPC.
राज्य राजधानी दिल्ली सरकार v. धूनू & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that adverse possession claims under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act cannot continue once possession is taken and acquisition proceedings are complete under the 1894 Act, setting aside the High Court's declaration of adverse possession over public land.
Bhoomi Evam Bhavan Nirman Vibhag v. Manish Seth & Ors.
The Supreme Court clarified that under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act, acquisition proceedings do not lapse if possession or compensation payment occurred within five years before the Act's commencement, overruling earlier contrary precedent.
Bhoomi Evam Bhavan Nirman Vibhag v. Manish Seth & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession was taken or compensation paid under the 1894 Act within five years prior to the 2013 Act's commencement, overruling earlier contrary decisions.