Delhi High Court
58,736 judgments
Manoj Kumar Sharma v. Karnail Singh
The High Court set aside the dismissal of a complaint for non-prosecution due to the complainant's absence on one date, emphasizing the need to consider overall diligence and procedural requirements before dismissal.
Rvr technologies ltd. v. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organization
The Delhi High Court dismissed two writ petitions against the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner as withdrawn on the petitioners' request following the trial court's decision.
Simran @ Samreen v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed two criminal writ petitions as withdrawn upon the petitioners' request for leave to withdraw.
Harinder Kaushik v. Union of India 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 nor deposited in court as mandated under the 1894 Act.
Bhoop Singh v. State & Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition upholding conviction under Section 138 NI Act, affirming presumption of notice receipt and rejecting the defence of stolen cheques due to delay and lack of evidence.
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Saddam & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the insurance company to withdraw its appeal against a motor accident compensation award and directed release of the awarded amount to claimants with refund of statutory deposits upon proof of satisfaction.
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Savita Devi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal challenging the validity of the driving licence and upheld the compensation awarded to the claimants, relying on police confirmation and binding precedent.
The New India Assurance Company Limited v. Prem Wati & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurer's appeal for exemption from liability due to lack of evidence that the driver lacked a valid licence, upholding the motor accident compensation award.
United India Insurance Company Limited v. Vindrawati & Ors.
The Delhi High Court reduced the compensation award by excluding non-pecuniary damages that do not survive death, upheld insurer's breach of policy plea due to absence of valid permit, and enhanced interest to 9% per annum.
United India Insurance Company Limited v. Pooja & Ors.
The Delhi High Court modified motor accident compensation awards by including service allowances in loss of dependency, reducing non-pecuniary damages per Supreme Court guidelines, lowering interest rate to 9%, and setting aside unjustified counsel fee directions.
United India Insurance Company Limited v. Sarita Devi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court reduced non-pecuniary damages and set aside counsel fees in a motor accident claim, while upholding insurer liability as the deceased was not a gratuitous passenger.
South Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Parmanand (Deceased) Through LRs & Ors
The Delhi High Court allowed the municipal corporation’s petition to admit relevant documents belatedly in a civil suit concerning public land, emphasizing public interest and fair trial rights.
Kadam Singh v. Tulsi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that after remand, the trial court must pass a fresh judgment on the entire civil suit and remanded the matter for appropriate adjudication, while dismissing the belated appeal for lack of condonation of delay.
Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Lata & Ors.
The Delhi High Court modified a motor accident compensation award by reducing future prospects enhancement to 25% and adjusting non-pecuniary damages in line with the Supreme Court's Pranay Sethi ruling.
United India Insurance Company Limited v. Pooja & Ors.
The Delhi High Court modified compensation awards in motor accident claims by including service allowances in loss of dependency, reducing non-pecuniary damages per Supreme Court precedent, and fixing interest at nine percent per annum.
Paramjit Singh v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings lapsed due to non-possession and non-payment of compensation, relying on Supreme Court precedent and statutory provisions.
ABBOTT HEALTHCARE PVT LTD v. RAJ KUMAR PRASAD & ORS
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, a stay of trademark infringement suit requires framing an issue on invalidity and timely initiation of rectification proceedings, and dismissed the plaintiff's premature stay application.
Satpal v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
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 declared the petitioner's land acquisition lapsed entitling him to compensation.
Bhagrati v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
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, allowing the petitioner's claim despite pending title disputes.
Kalu Ram v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act if compensation is not paid or deposited in court, regardless of title disputes.