Delhi High Court
58,104 judgments
Nipun Kumar Malhotra v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The High Court of Delhi issued an order recording reasons in writ petition W.P.(C) 5142/2018 involving the petitioner Nipun Kumar Malhotra and the Government of NCT of Delhi.
Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to consider the petitioners' representations regarding the exclusion of the Fifth Takhat Sahib under the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1971, without ruling on the constitutional validity of the provision.
Naresh Handa v. Sunil Kochhar
The Delhi High Court held that an order refusing to stay a suit under Section 10 CPC is not a decree but is challengeable under Article 227, and that the suit may proceed despite related earlier suits if the subject matter is not identical.
Pratap Singh and Ors. v. Ramjas Foundation
The Delhi High Court held that an order deciding a preliminary issue conclusively determining rights is a decree appealable under the CPC, and a petition under Article 227 challenging such order is not maintainable.
Jitendera Gaba v. Delhi Pollution Control Committee
The Delhi High Court directed the Delhi Pollution Control Committee to provide a speaking response to the petitioner's Representation within six weeks, disposing of the writ petition accordingly.
Choppa Aditya v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to make a fresh representation challenging the applicability of the 2004 Office Memorandum for UPSC Civil Services Examination and directed the respondents to provide a speaking response within a stipulated time.
G. Veerabahu v. National Institute of Education Planning and Administration
The Delhi High Court directed the respondent institute to implement committee recommendations on past service counting and reconsider the petitioner’s quarter allotment request through a reasoned order within a specified timeframe.
Hardayal Singh v. Directorate of Education
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking pay commission benefits for non-exhaustion of departmental remedies and directed the petitioner to first submit a representation to the competent authority.
Laxmi Kant Sharma and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed re-consideration of petitioners' claim for enhanced gratuity benefits from January 1, 2016, ensuring their representation is considered in light of the relevant Government of India Office Memorandum.
Dr. Saiqa Ikram v. Jamia Millia Islamia
The Delhi High Court directed Jamia Millia Islamia to decide the petitioner's pending representations within six weeks by a speaking order and communicate the decision promptly.
SHRI R. K. GUPTA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
The Delhi High Court directed the Bureau of Indian Standards to reconsider and pass a reasoned speaking order on the petitioner's representations against premature retirement, emphasizing the necessity of reasons in administrative decisions.
R.S. Chauhan v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court directed the government to consider the petitioner's fresh representation for the third MACP benefit and pass a speaking order within a stipulated timeframe.
Sanjay Kumar v. Rajesh Kumar
The Delhi High Court upheld a family settlement as valid ownership proof, dismissed tenancy claims lacking evidence, and decreed possession and mesne profits in favor of the plaintiff.
Satnam Chand Kohli & Anr. v. Satyam Construction Co. & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and awarded compensation to the appellants for wrongful withholding of a security deposit by respondents who had obtained mutation, sanctioned building plans, constructed, and sold the property despite the appellants fulfilling their contractual obligations.
Abdul Waqar & Anr. v. Abdul Gaffar
The Delhi High Court held that unilateral cancellation of executed sale documents is ineffective and recognized the defendants' right to possession of jointly held family property despite registration in the plaintiff's name.
U P Project Corporation Limited & Anr. v. M/S Maa Krupa Enterprises
The Delhi High Court allowed UPPCL’s appeal, holding that the Plaintiff failed to prove delivery and receipt of goods, thereby setting aside the recovery decree.
Union of India v. Tilak Raj Singh
The Delhi High Court held that a passenger injured due to railway negligence prior to the Railways Act is entitled to full tortious compensation, excluding limitation periods spent pursuing other forums, and enhanced the damages awarded.
Shankar Goswami v. Sarita Goswami & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that a suit for declaration of title was barred by res judicata as the issue of ownership was directly adjudicated in a prior final possession suit.
Kaushalya Sharma v. Kiran Devi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal seeking late impleadment in a partition suit, holding that without direct interest and clean hands, such applications post-final decree are not maintainable.
Mohd Rafiq v. Shobha Aggarwal
The Delhi High Court upheld the owner's right to possession against a tenant claiming ownership based on an incomplete sale, validating the rent agreement and directing the tenant to vacate within six months.