Delhi High Court

49,110 judgments

Year:

Narendra Plastic Private Limited v. Union of India & Ors.

16 Jan 2019 · Sanjiv Khanna; Anup Jai Ram Bhambhani · 2019:DHC:7938-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioners to withdraw their writ petitions and treated them as representations to the respondents for prompt examination and response, with liberty to revive the petitions if necessary.

administrative petition_allowed writ petition withdrawal of petition representation administrative response

M/S Gahalot Farms Pvt Ltd v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

16 Jan 2019 · R.K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:7582

The Delhi High Court set aside dismissal orders of cheque bounce complaints due to improper service of notices and restored the cases for further proceedings under its inherent jurisdiction.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 482 Cr.P.C. inherent jurisdiction dismissal for non-appearance

Bihar RPNN Ltd. Employees Union v. Union of India

16 Jan 2019 · Vipin Sanghi; A. K. Chawla · 2019:DHC:336-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging exclusion from revised pay scales, holding that distinct classes of employees governed by binding negotiated settlements may have different pay scales without violating constitutional equality principles.

labor petition_dismissed Significant equal pay for equal work wage settlement negotiated settlement Articles 14 and 16

Fitness First India Private Limited v. Ambience Developers and Infrastructure Private Limited

16 Jan 2019 · Navin Chawla · 2019:DHC:335

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitration award except for the quantum of damages for license fees and double rent claims, holding that an unregistered executory agreement can contain an enforceable arbitration clause but damages must be compensatory and supported by reasons.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration Agreement Executory Agreement Registration Act Lease Agreement

Devender Kumar v. Brijesh & Anr

16 Jan 2019 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2019:DHC:337

The Delhi High Court held that a Memorandum of Understanding without lawful consideration is void and unenforceable, dismissing the plaintiff's suit for recovery of amounts claimed thereunder.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Memorandum of Understanding consideration Indian Contract Act 1872 Section 25

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Vinod Kumar

16 Jan 2019 · I. S. Mehta, J. · 2019:DHC:310
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s award of compensation for permanent disability caused by rash and negligent driving of a DTC bus, dismissing the insurer’s appeal challenging the quantum of damages.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant motor accident claim permanent disability rash and negligent driving compensation

Chittaranjan Sahu & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

16 Jan 2019 · S. Muralidhar; Sanjeev Narula · 2019:DHC:308-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that retired Sergeants from the Indian Air Force are not eligible for re-employment as Sub Inspectors in BSF unless they held an analogous post, and dismissed their petition challenging rejection of such re-employment.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant re-employment ex-servicemen analogous post Indian Air Force

Bhola Ram Patel v. New Delhi Municipal Council and Anr.

16 Jan 2019 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Prateek Jalan · 2019:DHC:307-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld its interim directions regulating street vending pending constitution of Town Vending Committees, clarifying that only TVCs can conduct surveys and authorize eviction under the Street Vendors Act, 2014.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Street Vendors Act 2014 Town Vending Committee Survey of street vendors Eviction of street vendors

Mickey v. State

16 Jan 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:315

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner accused of robbery and related offences, considering prolonged custody and disputed evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed regular bail Section 392 IPC Section 397 IPC Section 411 IPC

Rajender v. State

16 Jan 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:316

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner accused of rape, considering discrepancies in evidence and the prosecutrix's death, subject to bail conditions.

criminal appeal_allowed regular bail Section 376 IPC rape allegation discrepancy in FIR and statement

Rohit v. State

16 Jan 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:317

The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused under Sections 308 and 34 IPC, considering his cooperation with investigation and the existence of a cross FIR against the complainant.

criminal petition_allowed anticipatory bail Section 308 IPC Section 34 IPC false implication

Govind Ram v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

16 Jan 2019 · R.K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:332

The High Court set aside the dismissal of a criminal complaint and directed the Sessions Court to reconsider the matter afresh, emphasizing the mandatory consideration of presummoning evidence and procedural fairness under CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC Section 200 CrPC Section 202 CrPC Section 156(3) CrPC

Tarun Samdarshi v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

16 Jan 2019 · R. K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:333

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the summoning order under Section 138 NI Act, holding that factual disputes like limitation and payee identity must be decided at trial and not at the summoning stage under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 482 CrPC Cheque bounce Summoning order

Ajay Kumar Singh v. Crane Operator Raj Kumar & Ors.

16 Jan 2019 · R. K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:334

The Delhi High Court held that a magistrate cannot entertain a second Section 156(3) CrPC application for police investigation without first taking cognizance and conducting a preliminary inquiry under Sections 190-202 CrPC, dismissing the petition challenging the revisional court's order setting aside the magistrate's direction for investigation.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 156(3) CrPC police investigation preliminary inquiry Section 190 CrPC

RAM BHARAT SHARMA v. RAM KISHORE SHARMA

16 Jan 2019 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2019:DHC:312

The Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition challenging a consent order in a property possession suit, affirming that ownership must be proved by valid documents and that consent orders are binding when passed in presence of parties.

civil petition_dismissed property dispute ownership title documents consent order

Sukesh Tyagi v. Vikas Bhasin

16 Jan 2019 · I. S. Mehta · 2019:DHC:313

The Delhi High Court set aside the compensation Award and remanded the motor accident claim for fresh adjudication to allow the appellant to prove the validity of the driving license by adducing additional evidence.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim driving license validity Order 41 Rule 27 CPC insurance policy breach

Renu Sharma v. Amit Goel

16 Jan 2019 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2019:DHC:318

The Delhi High Court held that a seller cannot forfeit the entire earnest money upon buyer's breach without proof of loss, limiting forfeiture to reasonable compensation under Section 74 of the Indian Contract Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant forfeiture of earnest money Section 74 Indian Contract Act agreement to sell breach of contract

M/S SREDDY INFRATECH PVT LTD v. M/S OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PVT LTD

16 Jan 2019 · G. S. Sistani; Jyoti Singh · 2019:DHC:338-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against an arbitral award rejecting claims arising from a subcontract terminated due to forged bank guarantees, affirming limited judicial interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act.

commercial appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration bank guarantee forgery termination of contract

Madan Mohan Sharma & Ors. v. State & Anr.

16 Jan 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:328

The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC based on an amicable settlement, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC as guided by Supreme Court precedent.

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

Rajesh Gutpa & Ors. v. State & Anr.

16 Jan 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:329

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC arising from a commercial dispute based on a settlement between parties, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC while considering the nature of the offence and public interest.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR economic offences settlement agreement