Delhi High Court
69,037 judgments
Sandeep & Ors. v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under multiple IPC sections on the basis of an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.
Vikram & Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable criminal FIR arising from matrimonial disputes under Section 482 Cr.P.C. based on an amicable settlement between the parties, emphasizing the Court's inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.
Vijay Pal Singh & Anr v. The State & Ors
The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable matrimonial offence FIR under Sections 498-A/406 IPC upon amicable settlement between parties, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.
Chandrashekhar Pandey & Anr v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 420, 468, and 471 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.
COMBA TELECOM LTD v. S TEL PVT LTD
The Delhi High Court granted a summary decree for recovery of unpaid dues with interest in a commercial contract where the defendant failed to appear or contest the suit.
Union of India & Ors. v. Amiya Kumar Jena & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's quashing of a review DPC's arbitrary downgrading of an officer's ACR, affirming that while DPCs have discretion in grading, contradictory assessments require reasoned justification to withstand judicial scrutiny.
Anil Kumar Mahato v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the selection process for Assistant Manager (Operations) in DMRC, holding that no bias or procedural irregularity was established and that the petitioner cannot challenge the process after participating without timely objection.
Satish Khurana and Anr v. MCD and Ors
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioners' claim to shop No. 46, holding that the allotment of an alternate plot to respondent No. 4 under the 1976 MCD policy was valid as respondent No. 4 was the actual occupant and the petitioners had no legal stake due to agency agreements and failure to meet eligibility criteria.
Javed v. State (NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of appellants for attempt to murder based on consistent ocular and medical evidence despite minor discrepancies in prosecution witnesses' statements.
Rashid v. State (NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court dismissed the criminal appeal of Rashid by referring to a detailed common judgment in a related case.
Vijender Kumar v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under multiple IPC sections based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.
Dev Prakash Sharma v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act case, holding that locus standi must be determined on full evidence and remanded the matter for fresh trial.
JAGDIP SINGH v. JASVINDER SINGH & ORS
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal affirming that a suit challenging a compromise decree is maintainable only if the underlying ex-parte decree is set aside, and a plaint cannot be rejected without opportunity to rectify court fee deficiency.
Shahid v. State (NCT of Delhi)
The High Court of Delhi dismissed Shahid's criminal appeal by referring to a detailed common judgment delivered in a related case on the same day.
Rajendra Prasad v. C. Ramesh
The Delhi High Court upheld the reinstatement of an employee whose termination was quashed due to lack of authority by the terminating body, emphasizing that delegation of disciplinary powers after termination does not validate prior invalid termination.
Shri R.K. Rametra and Another v. Shri Prakash Chand Kaushik
The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 does not apply to tenancy of vacant land with temporary structures, and civil courts have jurisdiction to entertain suits for possession in such cases even if the Act is extended to the area.
ORION SECURITY SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court held that rejection of a tender bid solely on the ground of low agency charges, absent any prohibition in tender conditions and without considering the bidder's financial viability, is arbitrary and directed reconsideration of the bid.
Abdul Mazid v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under the POCSO Act and IPC, ruling that minor contradictions and absence of semen evidence do not vitiate a credible prosecution supported by the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act.
Gaurav v. State (NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for robbery-related offences but set aside dacoity convictions due to failure to prove involvement of five or more persons as required under Section 395 IPC.
Sachdeva & Company v. Delhi-Gurgaon Super Connectivity Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that the Court cannot appoint an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act unless the arbitration clause is specifically incorporated and the institution fails to appoint an arbitrator as per agreed rules.