Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Mohd. Umar @ Umar Malik & Ors. v. State (Govt. of NCT) of Delhi & Anr.

01 Jul 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:5105

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under sections 498A, 406, 34 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act based on a voluntary settlement between the parties, reaffirming the court's power to end criminal proceedings in the interest of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 528 BNSS settlement in criminal cases Section 498A IPC

Maj Gen H Dharmarajan v. Union of India & Ors.

01 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:5081-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a non-recordable Reproof cannot be considered by the Selection Board for promotion, set aside the denial of promotion to the petitioner, and directed a review of his case for notional promotion with consequential pension benefits.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Reproof Defence Services Regulations 1987 Selection Board Promotion to Lieutenant General

Chhavi Agarwal v. Anurag Goel

01 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:5080-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant's partial non-compliance with a matrimonial settlement and withdrawal of consent for mutual divorce did not constitute wilful disobedience amounting to civil contempt.

family appeal_allowed Significant civil contempt wilful disobedience Settlement Agreement mutual consent divorce

Subodh Singh v. UOI & Ors.

01 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:5078-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside dismissal orders against two CISF constables due to insufficient evidence and procedural flaws in departmental enquiries, directing reinstatement and benefits, while upholding dismissal of a third petitioner.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant departmental enquiry dismissal from service judicial review Article 226

Union of India v. Maj Gen Rajesh Chaba

01 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:5083-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld Armed Forces Tribunal orders granting disability pension to retired personnel, holding that mere onset of disability in peace areas or obesity alone does not disentitle pension without cogent medical reasoning.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant disability pension armed forces Release Medical Board attributable to service

Union of India and Ors v. Ex MWO HFO Pramod Kumar Tripathi

01 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:5087-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's order granting disability pension under the 1982 Entitlement Rules, emphasizing the presumption of service-related disability and the employer's burden to disprove it.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Entitlement Rules 1982 Entitlement Rules 2008 presumption of sound health

Union of India & Ors. v. Ex Sub Meharban

01 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:5085-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's order granting disability pension for Primary Hypertension, holding that the Release Medical Board's rejection of aggravation by military service was inadequately reasoned and could be set aside.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Release Medical Board Categorisation Medical Board Primary Hypertension

Union of India & Ors. v. Sub Maj/M Tech (Opto Elect) Achyuta Pradhan (Retd)

01 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:5084-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's order granting disability pension to a retired army personnel for Primary Hypertension aggravated by military service, emphasizing the primacy of the Release Medical Board's expert opinion under the Entitlement Rules, 2008.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Release Medical Board Primary Hypertension Entitlement Rules 2008

Union of India and Ors. v. Col Prasanta Kumar Sharma

01 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:5086-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal’s order granting disability pension to a retired army officer, holding that the RMB’s rejection without cogent reasons was liable to be set aside where medical opinion indicated aggravation by military service.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Release Medical Board Categorisation Medical Board Primary Hypertension

Union of India & Ors. v. Ex Sgt Raj Kishor Mishra

01 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:5089-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's order granting disability pension to a retired Air Force personnel, holding that refusal to undergo surgery was reasonable and did not justify reducing the assessed disability percentage.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Release Medical Board refusal to undergo surgery Armed Forces Tribunal

Communication Components Antenna Inc. v. Ace Technologies Corp. and Ors.

01 Jul 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:5139-DB

The Delhi High Court Larger Bench held that the proviso to Order XXV Rule 1(1) CPC mandatorily requires foreign plaintiffs without sufficient immovable property in India to furnish security for costs, but only in suits relating to immovable property, with the quantum of security being discretionary.

civil other Significant Order XXV Rule 1(1) CPC security for costs mandatory proviso immovable property

Aadriti Pathak v. GD Goenka Public School & Anr.

01 Jul 2025 · Vikas Mahajan · 2025:DHC:5048

The Delhi High Court directed readmission of a child with autism in a private school with inclusive education and reasonable accommodations, emphasizing statutory duties under the RPwD Act and rejecting technical objections to her admission.

family appeal_allowed Significant Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 inclusive education reasonable accommodation children with special needs

Ambuj Hotel and Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Anr.

01 Jul 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:5123

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking enforcement of a commercial contract and quashing of increased license fee demand, holding that contractual disputes with arbitration remedy are not maintainable under Article 226.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant writ petition Article 226 contractual dispute arbitration clause

Sudershan Kumar v. Harish Chand Garg

01 Jul 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:5097

The Delhi High Court allowed the landlord’s eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, holding that the landlord’s bona fide need and choice of suitable accommodation must be respected and the tenant cannot dictate the use of premises.

property appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) bona fide need alternate suitable accommodation

Avinash Chander v. Delhi Development Authority

01 Jul 2025 · Vikas Mahajan · 2025:DHC:5049

The Delhi High Court held that a petitioner owning a flat with proportionate share less than 67 sq. meters is eligible for plot allotment under the Rohini Scheme and quashed the cancellation of his allotment.

property petition_allowed Significant Rohini Residential Scheme 1981 Delhi Development Authority Rule 17 Nazul Land Rules proportionate share

Naveen Khanna and Sons HUF v. Jet Air Private Ltd

01 Jul 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:5098

The Delhi High Court held that strict compliance with the lease deed's renewal notice requirement is mandatory, and in absence of valid renewal, mesne profits at market rent are payable for unauthorized occupation beyond lease expiry.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant lease renewal mesne profits tenant at sufferance registered post acknowledgment due

Union of India v. Laxman Public School & Anr.

01 Jul 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:5100

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union of India's delayed appeal challenging enhanced compensation for land acquisition, affirming the Reference Court's application of the principle of guesstimation to determine fair market value under the Land Acquisition Act.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 delay condonation limitation guesstimation

Bishan Singh v. Chinki & Ors

01 Jul 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3692
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court enhanced attendant charges compensation to cover two skilled attendants for 24-hour care in a motor accident claim involving 100% permanent disability and prolonged coma, applying the multiplier method.

civil appeal_allowed Significant attendant charges multiplier method 100% permanent disability prolonged vegetative state

Shankesh Mutha v. Union of India & Anr

01 Jul 2025 · Sanjeev Narula · 2025:DHC:5140
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court held that anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is maintainable in extradition proceedings under the Extradition Act, 1962, affirming the constitutional safeguard of personal liberty unless expressly excluded by statute.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC Extradition Act 1962 Section 25 Extradition Act

Santosh Kumar Singh v. State (Govt. of the NCT) of Delhi

01 Jul 2025 · Sanjeev Narula · 2025:DHC:5138
Cites 6 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court held that the Sentence Review Board must provide reasoned, case-specific decisions on premature release of life convicts, considering reformative conduct and applicable remission policies, and set aside arbitrary rejections lacking procedural fairness.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Sentence Review Board premature release life imprisonment remission policy