Delhi High Court
73,497 judgments
Ex Head Constable Nand Ram; Ex Constable Dhananjay Kumar S; Rajesh Kumar Sharma v. UOI & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal and punishment of BSF personnel for accepting bribes, ruling that a plea of guilt is valid despite absence of signatures if procedural safeguards are met and evidence is overwhelming.
Ratan Kumar & Anr v. The State NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 420 IPC on the basis of a lawful and amicable settlement between parties in a private land dispute, subject to compensation payment.
Rakesh Malik v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC on the ground of reconciliation between the spouses, allowing the petitioner’s writ petition under Section 482 CrPC.
M/S GAURAV WELDMESH PVT. LTD v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession and compensation are not completed within five years, and this benefit extends to subsequent purchasers.
Geeta Gulati and Ors v. Union of India and Ors
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 to landowners within five years, and mere deposit in treasury does not constitute payment.
RAM KISHAN GUPTA AND ORS v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act without possession and compensation are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, granting relief to the petitioners.
The State v. Mahender & Anr.
The Delhi High Court remanded a criminal case for retrial after the trial court acquitted accused due to resiling witnesses and incomplete prosecution evidence.
Guiness World Records Limited v. The Economist Newspaper Limited
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 7 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, all commercial suits filed or pending before the High Court's Commercial Division, including IPR matters below Rs. 1 crore, shall continue to be heard by the Commercial Division irrespective of pecuniary limits.
Madan Mohan Singh v. Sukhpal Singh
The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of a tenant under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRCA, holding the landlord’s bonafide need to enlarge the hotel reception area and absence of alternate accommodation were established.
Jauhri Lal & Anr. v. Gurudev Ashram Trust and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 92 CPC, courts may appoint interim trustees for public trusts but cannot dispose of suits by consent without framing a final management scheme after full hearing.
Samarth Shiksha Samiti v. Shakuntala Maggo
The Delhi School Education Act, 1973 applies to all schools in Delhi, recognized or unrecognized, and unrecognized schools must comply with its provisions or face regulatory action.
The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Kamlesh Kumari & Ors.
The Delhi High Court modified the compensation awarded in a motor accident claim by excluding future prospects for fixed salary employment, adjusting the multiplier based on claimant's age, enhancing non-pecuniary damages, and increasing interest rate to 9% per annum.
Mahipal v. High Court of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that a candidate ranked beyond the reduced number of General category vacancies, reserved in compliance with disability quota directions, is not entitled to appointment, dismissing the writ petition challenging the vacancy reduction.
Johny v. State
The Delhi High Court dismissed three criminal appeals as withdrawn upon the appellants' counsel seeking permission to withdraw them.
Commissioner of Customs Air Cargo Customs (Import) v. Escorts Heart Institute & Research Centre
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.
Raj Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
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.
Ratiram v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
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.
Ajab Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
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.
Gajinder v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
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.
SAMO v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
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.