Delhi High Court

72,805 judgments

Year:

Rahul & Ors. v. State & Anr.

01 Mar 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:1774

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable matrimonial offence FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC based on a genuine settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute

Vinod Singh Yadav v. M/S Securitans India Pvt Ltd

28 Feb 2016 · Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:1465

The Delhi High Court held that the Labour Court in Delhi has jurisdiction to adjudicate the industrial dispute as part of the cause of action accrued in Delhi, setting aside the order declining jurisdiction.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Labour Court jurisdiction Territorial jurisdiction Cause of action

Arvind Kaushik v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

26 Feb 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:485

The Delhi High Court directed a school to admit an EWS student and provide mandatory educational benefits, enforcing the student's right to free and compulsory education.

constitutional petition_allowed Economically Weaker Section Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 admission DOE allotment

Pankaj Bansal v. Commissioner of Customs (Import) & Anr.

24 Feb 2016 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:9001-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the release of goods retained by Customs authorities following the Settlement Commission's order settling dues and penalties, emphasizing mandatory compliance with such orders.

administrative appeal_allowed Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission differential customs duty release of goods settlement order

Union of India v. Suresh Kumar

18 Feb 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:600-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's decision quashing recovery of excess MACP payments from a retired employee without prior notice, reaffirming Supreme Court precedents protecting employees from retrospective pay reductions absent fraud or knowledge.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant excess payment recovery MACP pay fixation show cause notice principles of natural justice

Commissioner of Customs Air Cargo Customs (Import) v. Escorts Heart Institute & Research Centre

14 Feb 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2017:DHC:880-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the Revenue's appeal, holding that penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act is mandatory when invoked in the Show Cause Notice for mis-declaration, and set aside the CESTAT order deleting the penalty.

customs appeal_allowed Significant Customs Act, 1962 Section 112(a) Section 114A mis-declaration

Raj Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

13 Feb 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2017:DHC:835-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, regardless of physical possession.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings non-payment of compensation

Ratiram v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

13 Feb 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2017:DHC:836-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, granting the petitioner a declaration accordingly.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings compensation non-payment

Ajab Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

13 Feb 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2017:DHC:837-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years from the award date.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition non-payment of compensation

Gajinder v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

13 Feb 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2017:DHC:849-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is not paid within five years, declaring the petitioner’s acquisition proceedings lapsed due to non-payment.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings non-payment of compensation

SAMO v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

13 Feb 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2017:DHC:838-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, regardless of physical possession.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings non-payment of compensation

Balraj v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

13 Feb 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2017:DHC:840-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, regardless of possession claims.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition non-payment of compensation

Gajraj Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

13 Feb 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2017:DHC:842-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, granting the petitioner a declaration to that effect.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings non-payment of compensation

BPI (India) Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Creation for Children International NV

05 Feb 2016 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:5622-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that company directors are not personally liable for company debts absent personal guarantees or malfeasance, upheld the decree against the company alone, and dismissed the suit against the directors.

civil appeal_allowed Significant directors' liability personal guarantee agency principal-to-principal sale

All India Carrom Federation v. Union of India

04 Feb 2016 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2018:DHC:4866

The Delhi High Court examined the validity of All India Carrom Federation elections held in 2015, emphasizing strict compliance with the Sports Code and Ministry oversight to ensure fair and transparent elections.

administrative other Significant National Sports Federation Model Election Guidelines Sports Code 2011 Election validity

Vipin Malik & Anr. v. PACL India Ltd. & Ors.

02 Feb 2016 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2024:DHC:2515

The Delhi High Court dismissed the execution petition against PACL India Ltd., holding that the Supreme Court-appointed Lodha Committee's exclusive mandate precludes release of funds for rent arrears, granting liberty to seek alternative remedies.

civil petition_dismissed Significant execution petition Order XXI CPC Lodha Committee PACL India Ltd.

Govind Rawat v. Union of India & Ors.

01 Feb 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:2334
Cites 0 · Cited by 7

The Delhi High Court dismissed AIIMS's review petition, holding that resignation acceptance conditional on penalty payment is ineffective without such payment.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant resignation acceptance conditional acceptance subject to condition penalty for mid-term discontinuation

Dr. Bindu Rana v. Jai Radha Raman Education Society & Ors.

29 Jan 2016 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2016:DHC:8343

The Delhi High Court addressed procedural aspects and maintainability of a Section 11 arbitration petition, allowed exemption from filing original documents, and noted parties' agreement on appointment of a second arbitrator.

arbitration other Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator maintainability

Jagbir Singh v. State & Ors.

27 Jan 2016 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2016:DHC:2044-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a dowry death case, emphasizing that prosecution must prove cruelty soon before death beyond reasonable doubt and that appellate courts should not interfere with acquittals where two views are possible.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant dowry death Section 304B IPC cruelty harassment

Through: Mr. N. Mahabir and Mr P.C. Arya, Advocate v. CHIKITSABROTI UDYOG (SANJIVAN HOSPITAL) & ORS

20 Jan 2016 · JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR; 23.03.2017 · 2017:DHC:1704

Delhi High Court held it has jurisdiction to grant interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act to enforce an interim award and appointed a Local Commissioner with police assistance to remove hypothecated medical equipment from Respondents' premises.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 9 petition interim relief jurisdiction