Delhi High Court

79,582 judgments

Year:

Ramesh Kumar & Anr. v. State & Anr.

17 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:6664

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC on the basis of amicable settlement and harmonious living between the parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC Section 406 IPC

Brijesh Yadav & Ors. v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

17 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:6666

The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of an FIR under Sections 308, 341, 506, and 34 IPC based on amicable settlement between parties, applying the principles governing inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR compromise in criminal cases amicable settlement

Gurjeet Singh Bhatia & Anr. v. State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Ors.

17 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:6665

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 324, 506, and 34 IPC based on an amicable compromise between parties, applying the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC compromise deed amicable settlement

Satish Kumar & Ors. v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

17 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:6670

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from a matrimonial dispute on the basis of an amicable mediated settlement, applying the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to secure ends of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute mediated settlement

Swarn Singh Chawla v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Aug 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:6669-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings pending for over five years without possession or compensation are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, regardless of judicial stays preventing possession.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Section 24(2) statutory fiction

Gulbir Verma & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Aug 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:6668-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as possession was not taken and compensation was not paid or offered within five years, and the 2015 Ordinance proviso excluding certain periods does not apply retrospectively.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) of 2013 Act land acquisition possession compensation payment

Ravi v. Union of India and Ors.

17 Aug 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:6667-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act are deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession or compensation is not completed within five years, regardless of interim court stays, and that the 2015 Amendment Ordinance does not affect vested rights.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) of 2013 Act land acquisition deemed lapse statutory fiction

Shyam Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

17 Aug 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:6650-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse if compensation is unpaid for over five years under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, and that the 2015 Amendment Ordinance cannot retrospectively deny this right.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) Right to Fair Compensation Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings payment of compensation

Alimuddin Dehlwi v. State of Delhi

17 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:6656

The High Court declined to quash the FIR under Section 385 IPC, holding that the petitioner has an alternate remedy to raise objections before the trial court at the charge framing stage.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR alternate remedy charge framing

Sanjeev Chaudhry v. Director General, Indo Tibetan Border Police Force

17 Aug 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2015:DHC:6678-DB

The Delhi High Court held that dismissal for overstaying leave without permission must be proportionate and supported by a finding of wilfulness, substituting dismissal with reduction in rank due to mitigating family circumstances.

administrative petition_allowed Significant unauthorized absence wilful absence disciplinary proceedings dismissal from service

METROPOLITAN SOCIAL ART & CULTURAL SOCIETY v. DELHI STATE GOVERNMENT & ANR

17 Aug 2015 · BADAR DURREZ AHMED; SANJEEV SACHDEVA · 2015:DHC:6647-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld a tender condition requiring voluntary organizations to have a minimum 1,000 sq. yd. kitchen area, ruling it reasonable and not arbitrary under Article 14, and dismissed the petition challenging it.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant tender conditions judicial review Article 14 arbitrariness

Ram Ashish v. The State

17 Aug 2015 · Sanjiv Khanna; R. K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:6677-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the murder conviction of Ram Ashish Yadav due to reasonable doubt arising from discrepancies in the sole eyewitness testimony and investigative lapses.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant sole eyewitness testimony reasonable doubt investigative lapses abscondence

Union of India & Ors v. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal

17 Aug 2015 · G.S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015:DHC:6681-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the CAT order granting increments during suspension due to lack of notice and hearing, remanding the matter for fresh consideration.

administrative appeal_allowed Central Administrative Tribunal natural justice notice opportunity of hearing

Abhilasha v. Devender Kumar

17 Aug 2015 · Kailash Gambhir; P. S. Teji · 2015:DHC:6680-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Family Court's order granting restitution of conjugal rights to the husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, dismissing the wife's appeal alleging cruelty and harassment.

family appeal_dismissed Significant restitution of conjugal rights Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act cruelty in marriage interim maintenance

Abdul Rauf Javed & Ors. v. New Delhi Municipal Council

17 Aug 2015 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2015:DHC:6682

The Delhi High Court held that after lawful eviction and dismissal of all appeals, petitioners have no right to regularize license or claim possession of NDMC shop without participating in public auction.

property petition_dismissed Significant Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 eviction order finality license cancellation public auction

Shyam Singh v. Land Acquisition Collector

17 Aug 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:6653-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 and possession is incomplete, granting the petitioners a declaration of lapse.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Section 24(2) land acquisition lapse

Manak Devi v. Sheela Devi

17 Aug 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:6644-DB RFA(OS) 80/2015

The Delhi High Court upheld a preliminary decree recognizing collective undivided shares in a partition suit, holding that individual claims based on a Will require separate adjudication and are not barred by the decree.

civil appeal_dismissed partition suit preliminary decree Order XII Rule 6 CPC undivided share

Apollo Group Inc. & Ors. v. KK Modi Investment and Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

17 Aug 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2015:DHC:6639-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of defendants' applications to reject the plaint and delete parties, holding that non-parties bound by economic unity and control can be sued for breach of a non-compete clause and that the plaint disclosed a cause of action.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC Order 1 Rule 10 CPC corporate veil lifting non-compete clause

Raj Singh Decd Thr Lrs v. Union of India

17 Aug 2015 · Vipin Sanghi · 2015:DHC:6645
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Executing Court's refusal to grant additional compensation under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act for an award made before 30.04.1982, holding such a decree to be a nullity and unenforceable.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Act Section 23(1A) additional amount nullity of decree

Master Neelansh Sharma v. Ramjas School

17 Aug 2015 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2015:DHC:6679

The Delhi High Court held that private unaided schools may set minimum academic criteria for admission beyond the 25% seats reserved under the RTE Act, and denied mandamus for admission to a student scoring below the cut-off.

education petition_dismissed Significant Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 screening procedure private unaided schools admission criteria