Delhi High Court
48,408 judgments
Nazimuddin & Ors. v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 34 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act based on a mediated settlement, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.
Mizul Singh v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498A and others IPC based on an amicable settlement, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC as per Supreme Court precedent.
Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar & Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocates v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on a mediated settlement in a matrimonial dispute, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.
SSAY & ASSOCIATES v. INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA
The Delhi High Court upheld the ICAI Board's order dismissing professional misconduct allegations against KNA Associates for accepting an auditor appointment without obtaining a no objection certificate from the petitioner, who was not the previous auditor.
ECI-NAYAK (JV) v. IRCON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED & ANR.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking to restrain invocation of Bank Guarantees and contract termination, holding that such invocation is justified due to the petitioner's defaults and that interim reliefs cannot override contractual and arbitral dispute resolution mechanisms.
ISPA Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. v. New Delhi Municipal Council
The Delhi High Court set aside a blacklisting order against a pharmaceutical firm for submitting fabricated test reports, holding that principles of natural justice were violated as the firm was not given a fair hearing.
Ramesh Chander Goyal & Ors. v. Leo Ispat Ltd & Anr.
The Delhi High Court allowed delayed cross-examination under Section 311 Cr.P.C. on contradictions in collateral proceedings in Section 138 NI Act cases, subject to costs, emphasizing justice over procedural delay.
M/S DEEPAK AUTOMOBILES v. SANJEEVNANDA
The Delhi High Court allowed appeals restoring complaints dismissed in default under Section 138 N.I. Act, holding that the complainant should not be penalized for the advocate's default and permitting restoration upon payment of costs.
Manish Kumar Agarwal v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 420 and 406 IPC based on a settlement between parties, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for offences with a predominant civil element.
Deepak Madan v. State
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 287 and 338 IPC arising from an accidental injury at the workplace, relying on compensation and settlement between parties under its inherent jurisdiction.
Vinay Verma & Ors. v. State of Delhi & Anr
The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of an FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute settled amicably, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.
Sh. Manish Mohan & Ors. v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of an FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute upon amicable settlement between parties, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Jatinder Khurana & Anr v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed two cross FIRs under IPC on the ground that the parties had settled their dispute, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to prevent oppressive criminal proceedings.
Jatinder Khurana & Anr v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs registered due to a resolved misunderstanding, applying Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of the criminal process in disputes with a predominant civil element.
Vikrant Chopra & Ors. v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of an FIR arising from matrimonial disputes under Sections 498-A, 406, 377, and 34 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties under its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.
Puneet Kumar Narula v. Afzal Fakir Shah & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction exists where part of the cause of action arises, allowed impleadment and amendment applications, and set aside the Trial Court's orders dismissing the suit for lack of jurisdiction.
Pradeep Khullar v. The State & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted probate for the uncontested Will dated 4th May 1986 but refused probate for the disputed Codicil pending appeal, and held that declaratory relief regarding another Will is not maintainable in probate proceedings.
Puneet Kumar Narula v. Afzal Fakir Shah & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that part of the cause of action arising in Delhi confers territorial jurisdiction and allowed impleadment of necessary parties, setting aside the Trial Court's orders dismissing the suit and returning the plaint.
Yogesh Yadav v. The Director General Resettlement & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the dis-empanelment of a security agency for sharing office space and furnishing incorrect address particulars in violation of DGR's Office Memorandum.
Tapan Kumar Deo v. Union of India and Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the ACC's decision declining the petitioner's appointment as Presiding Officer of the Debt Recovery Tribunal, holding that the ACC's collective discretion in appointments is final and representations to the Prime Minister post-judicial adjudication are not maintainable.