Delhi High Court
65,687 judgments
Pankaj Verma v. State of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the framing of charges under Section 307/34 IPC against the petitioner, holding that the victim's credible testimony and material on record justified proceeding to trial.
Iqbal Ahmed & Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 lapse if possession is not taken and compensation not paid within five years, applying Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act and relevant Supreme Court precedents.
Iqbal Ahmed & Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse if possession and compensation are not completed within five years prior to the 2013 Act, declaring the petitioners' acquisition proceedings lapsed.
Kuldeep v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is neither paid nor deposited in court, and directed payment of compensation as per the 2013 Act.
Asha Praksh v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse if compensation is unpaid and possession not taken within five years, and successors in interest have locus standi to seek such declaration.
Sukhram v. NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that the Commissioner under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 has statutory authority to recover awarded compensation as arrears of land revenue, and no separate mechanism is required for enforcement.
Nitin Gupta v. M/S Aakash Metal Industries
The High Court upheld the Trial Court’s closure of the accused’s right to cross-examine the complainant under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act after repeated failure to file the requisite application.
Nikhil Kumar Kundra v. The State (NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner accused of cheating by obtaining a bank loan on forged property documents, emphasizing the need to prevent interference with investigation in serious offences.
Mehboobur-Rehman v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapsed due to non-payment of compensation and non-taking of possession, granting the authority one year to initiate fresh proceedings under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act or return possession to original owners.
Ram Kishan & Others v. Union of India & Anr.
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 nor deposited in court, rejecting deposit in government treasury as sufficient payment.
Kuldeep & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is neither paid nor deposited in court within five years, entitling petitioners to compensation under the 2013 Act.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - 6 v. M/S. Mohan Export India Private Limited
The Delhi High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal, holding that commission payments supported by agreements and regulatory compliance are allowable business expenses under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, and unexplained cash deposit additions require credible evidence.
China Garden Restaurant v. M/S Venus Industries
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's second appeal, upholding the trial and appellate courts' findings that the respondent proved delivery of goods and was entitled to recover the outstanding amount based on credible invoices and evidence.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, New Delhi v. National Informatics Centre Services Inc.
The Delhi High Court upheld that an electronically filed income tax return without digital signature is valid if the verification form ITR-V is furnished within the extended period prescribed by CBDT circulars, rendering a belated notice under Section 143(2) time-barred.
New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Amresh & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld compensation awarded under the Employees Compensation Act for death caused by a criminal act during employment, dismissing insurer's appeal.
Union of India v. Ameena Bano & Anr
The Delhi High Court set aside a compensation award by the Railway Claims Tribunal, holding that the claimants failed to prove the deceased was a bona fide passenger on the train at the time of the fatal accident.
Mukesh Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and the death caused by jumping in front of a train does not qualify as an untoward incident under the Railways Act, thus no compensation is payable.
POWER GRID CORPN.OF INDIA LTD. v. KARNATAKA POWER TRANS. CORP. LTD.
The Delhi High Court upheld the CERC's dismissal of a review petition seeking to restore a reduced Interest During Construction claim, holding that new evidence not produced with due diligence cannot be admitted at the review stage.
General Manager Uttarakhand Parivhan Nigam v. Tejpal & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the negligence finding against the Uttarakhand Roadways bus driver and enhanced compensation in certain death cases, applying established principles for calculating motor accident claims.
General Manager Uttarakhand Parivhan Nigam v. Tejpal & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the negligence finding against the Uttarakhand Roadways bus driver in a fatal accident and enhanced compensation awards in certain death cases applying established principles for motor accident claims.