Delhi High Court
58,104 judgments
Siya Ram v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 288, 337, and 304A IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.
Shri Dineshwar Nath Kedar v. M/S Gopal Dass and Sons
The Delhi High Court allowed the landlord's eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, holding that the bona fide requirement was genuine and alternative accommodations were not reasonably suitable.
Nakul Sharma v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279, 304A, and 337 IPC based on an amicable settlement and exercised inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.
Prateek Raj Mathur and Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed FIR No. 217/2024 and all proceedings based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.
Navneet Kumar & Anr. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR involving forgery and cheating based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice.
Maxwell Singh v. The State of NCT of Delhi and Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279 and 304A IPC based on an amicable settlement and exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and serve the ends of justice.
SK Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed appeals challenging cognizance and refused to quash FIR alleging offences under IPC and SC/ST Act, holding that sufficient material existed for trial and inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC should be sparingly exercised.
Sachin Bajpai v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court stayed a notice summoning an advocate during investigation, reaffirming client-advocate privilege and procedural safeguards against summoning lawyers without proper grounds.
Sachin @ Atul v. State
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant for robbery with a deadly weapon under Sections 392/34 read with 397 IPC based on credible eyewitness and complainant testimony corroborated by recovery of weapon and stolen property.
Sh. Sonu v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a stepfather for sexual offences against his minor stepdaughter, affirming that credible child witness testimony alone can sustain conviction under the POCSO Act.
ARIAT INTERNATIONAL INC. v. SUNGLASS PALACE INDIA PVT LTD
The Delhi High Court granted interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act directing the respondent to disclose sales details to preserve the subject matter of an international commercial arbitration dispute involving alleged breach of territorial restrictions.
Jawaharlal Malhotra & Anr v. State & Ors
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the probate granted on a disputed Will due to unresolved suspicious circumstances and non-compliance with Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
Malaya Kumar Chand v. Prem Kumar Verma & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal against refusal of interim injunction in a property dispute involving contested title and long-standing possession, holding that disputed title and forgery allegations cannot be conclusively decided at the interlocutory stage.
M/S Ram Swaroop and Sons v. Shri Riyazuddin and Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld Labour Court Awards holding the termination of workmen illegal for non-compliance with Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act and directed reinstatement with back wages.
M/S KHUBI RAM RAJIV KUMAR & CO THR PARTNER RAM AVTAR BANSAL v. M/S NAVEEN ENTERPRISES
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal setting aside the arbitral award’s rejection of contractual interest, holding that arbitral tribunals must enforce clear contractual terms and may award interest under Section 31(7) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
HT Media Limited v. Pyramid Finmart Private Limited
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court's role is limited to a prima facie examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator accordingly, leaving all substantive disputes to arbitration.
Sushma Sharma @ Sushma Kumari Sharma v. Vijay Singh & Ors.
Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by correctly applying future prospects, multiplier, and awarding separate loss of consortium to all eligible claimants, while deleting duplicative non-pecuniary damages.
Sushila Devi Jain v. Adesh Kumar Gupta
The Delhi High Court allowed the landlord's revision petition, setting aside the dismissal of eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act, holding bona fide requirement established and no material concealment, and ordered eviction of the tenant.
National Insurance Company Ltd v. Sanju and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that loss of dependency in fatal accident claims involving minors must be computed based on minimum wages payable to a skilled worker with multiplier 18, overruling reliance on fixed notional income under the pre-amendment Motor Vehicles Act.
Ashish Kumar Thakur & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that the vacancy year for additional Income Tax Officer posts is the year of Cabinet approval (2013-14), not the year of subsequent notification.