Delhi High Court
65,687 judgments
Gopi Nisha Mallah v. State (NCT of Delhi)
The High Court set aside the Trial Court’s closure of defence evidence when the accused was in custody and unable to produce witnesses, granting an opportunity to lead defence evidence to ensure a fair trial.
Ashwani Goyal v. Union of India & Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging non-appointment to a reserved post, holding that a candidate not recommended by the Selection Board has no enforceable right to appointment even under special recruitment policies for persons with disabilities.
Daya Ram Mittal and Ors. v. UOI and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession is not taken and compensation is neither paid to landowners nor deposited in court, relying on Supreme Court precedent.
Raheja Developers Limited v. Proto Developers and Technologies Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that it has jurisdiction to grant extension of time for arbitral award under Section 29-A(5) despite the Section 11 application being filed in another High Court, affirming that the seat of arbitration determines exclusive jurisdiction.
Ajay Kumar v. Land Acquisition Collector & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the Land Acquisition Collector to grant a personal hearing and pass a reasoned order on the petitioner’s compensation applications under the Land Acquisition Act, emphasizing adherence to natural justice.
Asha Ram Tyagi v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if neither possession is taken nor compensation is paid or deposited in court, overruling deposit in government treasury as sufficient payment.
Naresh Chandra Rastogi and Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is neither paid nor deposited in court, and mere deposit in government treasury is insufficient.
Usman alias Kale and Ors. v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and life sentences of appellants for gang rape based on credible prosecutrix testimony, TIP identification, and corroborative forensic evidence, dismissing claims of false implication and flawed investigation.
Experion Developers Private Limited v. UP Television Network Private Limited
Delhi High Court held that a defamatory report against a real estate company was false and malicious, granted permanent injunction and Rs. 5 lakh damages, affirming a company's right to sue for defamation and the court's jurisdiction over online publications.
GENESISINFRATECHPVTLTD v. TARUNPURI
The Delhi High Court directed disputes arising from loan and sale agreements to arbitration while allowing concurrent criminal proceedings under Section 138 NI Act to continue.
Islam Uddin v. Cambridge Sr School & Ors
The Delhi High Court upheld the termination of a teacher for abandonment of service without holding an enquiry, affirming that such termination by the competent authority is valid and within jurisdiction.
Mohd. Mubarak & Anr. v. Lalit Mohan Sharma & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's refusal to reject a plaint on limitation grounds where the question of limitation involved mixed questions of fact and law regarding alleged forgery of documents.
Murari Lal v. Suman Lata & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order allowing impleadment of a party claiming interest in disputed family property under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, dismissing the petition challenging it.
Anil Bole & Anr. v. Shri Banarsidas Chandiwala Sewa Smarak Trust Society
The Delhi High Court upheld eviction of tenants by a charitable trust on bona fide need grounds under the Delhi Rent Control Act, dismissing tenant defenses including authorization and suitability of premises.
Union of India v. M/S Jia Lall Kishori Lall Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award granting damages for delay caused by the petitioner, rejecting allegations of arbitrator bias and affirming that statutory rights under Section 73 of the Contract Act cannot be contractually excluded.
Nirmal Gorana v. Department of Health and Family Welfare
The Delhi High Court directed the Government to deploy trained ASHA workers and ensure effective implementation of ICDS and related health schemes in Badarpur within three months to prevent deprivation of maternal and child healthcare benefits.
Amit Katyal v. Union of India and Anr.
The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner an opportunity to cure procedural defects causing Director disqualification under the Companies Act, 2013 by availing the CODS-2018 scheme, emphasizing natural justice and procedural compliance.
Tushar Mittal v. Union of India and Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that a director whose resignation is reflected in annual returns cannot be disqualified under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 due to the company’s failure to file Form 32.
V. Bhaskar v. Ministry of Minority Affairs
The Delhi High Court directed the employer to treat the petitioner's legal notices as representations and pass a reasoned order before any coercive recovery action, ensuring procedural fairness.
Dilbagh Singh & Anr. v. State
The Delhi High Court acquitted appellants in a murder case due to unreliable eyewitness testimony, contradictions in evidence, and failure to prove common intention beyond reasonable doubt.