Delhi High Court
93,075 judgments
ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd v. Ram Manik and Ors.
The Delhi High Court reduced the compensation awarded to a self-employed accident victim by disallowing addition for future prospects and recalculating loss of earning capacity, affirming the power of appellate courts to award just compensation beyond claimed amounts.
ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Anjana Patial & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal, upholding the motor accident compensation awarded for the deceased's death due to the insured bus driver's negligence and validating the addition of future prospects.
Pawan Kumar v. Delhi Transport Corporation
The Delhi High Court held that an employee acquiring any degree of disability during probation is entitled to alternative employment and benefits under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, even if disability is less than 40%.
M/S NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA v. M/S ORIENTAL STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.
The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award, holding that judicial review under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 is limited to procedural legitimacy and does not permit reappraisal of contract interpretation or factual findings.
Mankind Pharma Ltd v. Sanjeev Kumar Aggarwal and Ors
The Delhi High Court accepted a voluntary out-of-court settlement in a civil suit, decreed the suit accordingly, and granted a 50% refund of court fees under Section 16-A of the Court Fees Act, 1870.
M/S B.N SONS v. NORTHERN RAILWAY & ANR
The Delhi High Court disposed of the suit by directing appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes over withheld tender amounts, with parties agreeing to abide by the arbitrator's award.
Sheela Devi v. Triloki Nath and Others
The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiff's application to withdraw the civil suit on the basis of a settlement with the defendants' successor-in-title, dismissing the suit as withdrawn.
Deepankar Mittal v. Mohinder Singh
The Delhi High Court disposed of the execution petition after the warrants of attachment were executed and possession of the property was delivered to the Decree Holder, satisfying the decree.
M/S. JAIBHARAT TEXTILE & REAL ESTATE LTD v. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-II EMPLOYEES
The Delhi High Court restrained coercive recovery under EPF Act pending hearing of statutory appeal, due to non-appointment of the Appellate Tribunal's Presiding Officer.
M/S M LACHHMANDAS AND CO. v. UOI AND ORS
The Delhi High Court restrained coercive recovery actions against the petitioner until the statutory appeal could be heard due to the government's failure to appoint the Presiding Officer of the Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal.
Siya Ram Dwivedi v. New Holland Fiat India Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court upheld an ex parte arbitral award, holding that non-participation despite due notice and pendency of criminal proceedings do not invalidate arbitration, and the award was not patently illegal or against public policy.
Sudhir Kumar Jain v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the termination of the petitioner as CMD of Syndicate Bank under Clause 8(1A) of the Nationalised Banks Scheme 1970, ruling that non-payment of three months’ salary in lieu of notice entitles only to compensation but does not invalidate the termination.
Pawan Kumar Seth v. Custodian of Enemy Property of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court set aside the Custodian of Enemy Property's certificate and orders for violating the petitioner's right to be heard, directing reconsideration of his representations under the Enemy Property Act.
Churchill Brothers Sports Club Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Anr
The Delhi High Court declined interim relief to a football club challenging licensing deficiencies, emphasizing adherence to procedural norms and regulatory compliance pending final adjudication.
Shabbu & Ors. v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs under Sections 308, 323, 341, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties before trial, emphasizing the court's power to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.
Shabbu & Ors. v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs arising from a property dispute on the basis of an amicable settlement before trial, applying the principle that continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process.
Mohd Naushan & Ors. v. The State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement in a matrimonial dispute, emphasizing that continuation of criminal proceedings would be futile once parties have resolved their differences.
Vijay Aggarwal v. The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC based on a fully complied amicable settlement in a matrimonial dispute, emphasizing the court's power to prevent futile criminal proceedings.
Ram Rati & Others v. The State & Others
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC on the ground of amicable settlement between the parties in a matrimonial dispute, emphasizing that continuation of proceedings would be futile.
Farzana v. The State of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking quashing of FIRs involving serious offences, holding that settlements cannot override the need for trial once charges are framed and prosecution evidence recorded.