Delhi High Court

47,108 judgments

Year:

Dalip Kumar Gupta v. Kushal Chand Garg & Ors.

14 Aug 2019 · Rekha Palli · 2019:DHC:3986

The Delhi High Court upheld a possession decree in favor of a charitable trust against a licensee-turned-tenant who failed to prove ownership based on an oral agreement, affirming that tenancy termination entitles rightful owners to possession despite pending suits for specific performance.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant possession suit oral agreement to sell lease deed Transfer of Property Act

Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Bhushan Steel Limited & Ors.

14 Aug 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:4001

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the petitioner accused of financial fraud under the Companies Act, 2013, holding that statutory bail embargo is subject to judicial discretion based on the accused's role and case facts.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Companies Act 2013 Section 212 economic offence

Vicky Bidhlan @ Vicky Birla & Ors. v. State & Anr.

14 Aug 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:4004

The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute upon amicable settlement between parties, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 498-A IPC quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC matrimonial dispute

Manmohan & Anr v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

14 Aug 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:4003

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 498-A IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute on the ground of amicable settlement, exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 498-A IPC Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute

Sh. Anoop @ Sonu & Ors. v. State & Anr.

14 Aug 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:4002

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC matrimonial dispute Section 498-A IPC

Shogun Organics Ltd. v. Gaur Hari Guchhait & Ors.

14 Aug 2019 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2019:DHC:3988

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of Shogun Organics' process patent for manufacturing d-trans Allethrin and granted permanent injunction against defendants for infringement due to their failure to disclose their manufacturing process and evidence of identical chemical markers.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Patent infringement Process patent d-trans Allethrin Insecticides Act

O P Gupta & Ors. v. Deepak Gupta & Ors.

14 Aug 2019 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2019:DHC:3989

The Delhi High Court directed equitable allocation of an unused servant quarter to the mother and daughter for their lady caretaker in a family property dispute.

civil appeal_allowed servant quarters family property dispute equitable possession lady caretaker

Union of India v. Tarun Kumar Kakar

14 Aug 2019 · Yogesh Khanna · 2019:DHC:4005

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of transfer between co-lessees by agreement and GPA for mutation and conversion of leasehold property, and dismissed the government’s appeal for condonation of delay due to lack of sufficient cause.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant transfer between co-lessees agreement to sell general power of attorney mutation of property

Rumy Chowdhury v. The Department of Revenue, Government of NCT, Delhi & Anr.

14 Aug 2019 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2019:DHC:3999
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that children of inter-caste marriages must prove upbringing and social disadvantages in the mother's Scheduled Caste community to obtain caste certificates, and mere adoption of the father's forward caste surname or absence of paternal caste certificate is insufficient.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Scheduled Caste certificate inter-caste marriage maternal caste paternal caste certificate

Lalita Saini v. State & Anr

14 Aug 2019 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2019:DHC:3990

The Delhi High Court held that the 90-day period under Section 167(2)(a)(i) CrPC applies for filing charge-sheet in offences under Section 409 IPC, setting aside default bail granted on a 60-day interpretation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant default bail Section 167 CrPC Section 409 IPC charge-sheet filing period

Abhishek Tanwar v. The State of Delhi (NCT of Delhi)

14 Aug 2019 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2019:DHC:3991

The Delhi High Court upheld the framing of charges under Sections 308, 323, 506, and 34 IPC, holding that simple injuries and non-recovery of weapon do not preclude trial if a prima facie case exists.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant framing of charges Section 308 IPC simple injury prima facie case

S.D. Singh v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

14 Aug 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:3987
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging disciplinary removal of an insurance officer for approving fraudulent cattle insurance claims, holding that the inquiry was fair and findings were supported by evidence.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings bogus insurance claims departmental inquiry principles of natural justice

Sarabjeet Kaur v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi

14 Aug 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:3997

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner accused under Sections 406, 420, 120B, and 174A IPC on furnishing security and undertaking to prevent alienation of immovable property.

criminal appeal_allowed regular bail Sections 406, 420, 120B, 174A IPC immovable property security bail conditions

Purnima Uppal & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

14 Aug 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:3998

The Delhi High Court quashed multiple FIRs arising from a family dispute following a settlement between parties, emphasizing mediation and imposing conditions to ensure compliance and public interest.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR family dispute settlement mediation

Purnima Uppal & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

14 Aug 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:3996

The Delhi High Court quashed multiple FIRs arising from a family dispute following an amicable settlement between parties and directed tree plantation as a condition of the settlement.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR family dispute settlement Section 482 CrPC

Purnima Uppal & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

14 Aug 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:3994

The Delhi High Court quashed multiple FIRs arising from family disputes following an amicable settlement between parties, emphasizing mediation and restorative justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR family dispute mediation and conciliation settlement agreement

National Pharmaceutical Pric.A v. Garima Seth

14 Aug 2019 · G.S. Sistani; Jyoti Singh · 2019:DHC:4011-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order granting contractual Data Entry Operators pay parity with regular employees under the principle of equal pay for equal work despite absence of regular posts.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant equal pay for equal work contractual employees pay parity Data Entry Operators

DSP Manoj Pathak v. State

14 Aug 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:4000

The Delhi High Court held that mandatory sanction under Section 140 Delhi Police Act and Section 197 CrPC is essential for prosecuting police officials, and non-obtaining of such sanction mandates discharge and quashing of proceedings.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant sanction under Delhi Police Act Section 197 CrPC prosecution of police officials discharge of accused

Tara Singh and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

14 Aug 2019 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:680-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 26

The Delhi High Court upheld denial of compassionate appointment but remanded the legality of compulsory retirement for fresh consideration by the Tribunal.

administrative appeal_allowed Procedural compulsory retirement vision malingering compassionate appointment Central Administrative Tribunal

INFRA COOL PRIVATE LIMITED v. ASSAM INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD

13 Aug 2019 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2019:DHC:3966

Delhi High Court dismissed the Section 11 petition for appointment of arbitrator due to lack of jurisdiction as the arbitration agreement's seat was not in Delhi and the petitioner could not rely on an alternate arbitration clause.

civil petition_dismissed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 jurisdiction Arbitration agreement Seat of arbitration