Delhi High Court
93,453 judgments
Virendra Singh Khaira v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking modification of a CAT order on back wages due to unexplained delay and laches, reaffirming that writ relief is discretionary and barred by inordinate delay.
State v. Sunil Kumar
The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's leave petition against acquittal, holding that failure to produce key evidence and witnesses justified adverse inference and benefit of doubt to accused.
Raj Hans Towers Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax-V
The Delhi High Court upheld the addition of undisclosed income based on a statement recorded during a survey under Section 133A, holding such statements as relevant material for tax assessment in absence of credible retraction.
Pritam Singh; Neeraj Tyagi; Adesh Kumar Tyagi v. State
Delhi High Court granted bail to accused in forgery and cheating case based on FSL report not implicating them, making interim bail absolute.
Shrinaved Ahmad Khan v. State
The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC, subject to furnishing bond and cooperating with the investigation.
Vinod Kumar Sharma v. The State of Delhi
The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused under Sections 498A and 406 IPC, subject to conditions ensuring cooperation with investigation and non-harassment of the complainant.
Praveen Thakur v. State of Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking cancellation of bail at the fag end of trial, holding that bail should not be cancelled when prosecution evidence is nearly complete.
Kuldeep Singh v. State
The Delhi High Court disposed of the petition seeking cancellation of pre-arrest bail as infructuous after noting the filing of a closure report and pendency of the protest petition before the trial court.
Adesh Kumar Tyagi v. State
The Delhi High Court dismissed the criminal petition as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to pursue remedies after investigation completion.
Manoj Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the appointment of respondent no. 4 as Chairman of the Rehabilitation Council of India, ruling that neither registration under Section 13 nor age above 65 years disqualifies such appointment.
Prem Wati Saini v. Suresh Chand Saini & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the suit for default and non-prosecution due to the plaintiff's failure to comply with court orders and prosecute the case diligently.
Ms. Usha Mann & Ms. Vijayata M. Bhalla, Advocates v. THE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....
The Delhi High Court dismissed a belated application challenging a promotion order on grounds of fraud, emphasizing the need for promptness in raising fraud pleas and upholding the finality of its earlier order affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Saba Khan v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act without possession or compensation for over five years before the 2013 Act are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
Poonam Sawhney v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act shall be deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if no possession or compensation occurred within five years, and this right extends to subsequent purchasers.
Allimuddin & Anr v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & 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 unpaid for over five years, and compensation deposited in court without tendering to landowners does not constitute payment.
Luv Malhotra & Anr v. Union of India & Ors
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession and compensation remain pending for over five years, regardless of court stay orders, and that subsequent amendments cannot retrospectively affect vested rights.
Deepak Seth and Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
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 subsequent purchasers are entitled to this benefit.
Iqbal Singh v. Subhash Chand
The Delhi High Court set aside the condition to deposit 50% of the award amount for setting aside an ex-parte award when the petitioner was not properly served, directing the Claims Tribunal to decide the claim expeditiously.
Reliance Gen. Ins Co. Ltd. v. Sh. Tapan Roy & Ors.
The Delhi High Court reduced compensation for loss of amenities to avoid duplication when a high percentage of loss of earning capacity was awarded in a motor accident claim.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rahul Sharma & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that the Detailed Accident Report must be treated as a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and if the insurance company's offer is rejected, the Claims Tribunal must frame and decide the issue of negligence before awarding compensation.