Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Manmohan Singh @ Manmohan Singh Sethi v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

09 Apr 2025 · Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:2492

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, applying Supreme Court precedents on quashing criminal proceedings in matrimonial disputes.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC Section 34 IPC

Sh. Chetan Khanna and Ors. v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

09 Apr 2025 · Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:2486

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, emphasizing peace and harmony between parties.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Seema T Telgote v. Union of India & Anr.

09 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:2468-DB

The Delhi High Court held that death due to a dog bite causing rabies is an accidental death under the Group Insurance Scheme, entitling the petitioner to the Double Accident Benefit despite absence of FIR and post-mortem.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Double Accident Benefit Group Insurance Scheme dog bite rabies

Sunil Singh Dev v. Union of India and Ors

09 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:2467-DB

The Delhi High Court held that delay in appointment caused by the employer cannot deprive a senior employee of promotion and pay parity vis-à-vis juniors, directing notional promotion from the juniors' promotion date.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant promotion seniority notional promotion delayed appointment

Nayeem Ahmad Khan v. National Investigation Agency

09 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:2472-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's bail plea in a terrorism conspiracy case under the UA(P) Act, holding that the prima facie evidence and framed charges justify continued detention under Section 43D(5) despite prolonged incarceration.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act Section 43D(5) terrorism

Raj Kumar Tiwari HUF v. Satya Prakash Kansal

09 Apr 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:3513

The Delhi High Court held that a suit for recovery of money lent is barred by limitation if filed beyond three years from the loan date, and a mere assurance to repay does not extend limitation absent written acknowledgment, allowing the appeal and rejecting the plaint.

civil appeal_allowed Significant limitation period recovery of money Article 19 Limitation Act Article 113 Limitation Act

Sukhdev Tiwari v. Satya Prakash Kansal

09 Apr 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:3512

The Delhi High Court held that a suit for recovery of money lent filed beyond three years from the loan date is barred by limitation and liable to be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC in absence of written acknowledgment extending limitation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant limitation Order VII Rule 11 CPC money lent Limitation Act 1963

Union of India v. M/S GLOBAL ENTERPRISES

09 Apr 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:3123-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union of India's appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, upholding the arbitral award and affirming the limited scope of judicial interference in arbitration appeals.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 petition Section 37 appeal Arbitral award

SI Mahesh Kumar P.S. Kalkaji v. Deepak Kumar Paswan

09 Apr 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:3313

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a rape and criminal intimidation case, holding that consent was voluntary and not vitiated by a false promise of marriage.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant consent false promise of marriage Section 376 IPC Section 506 IPC

Amar Singh Kushwaha v. Union of India

09 Apr 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:2659-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Amar Singh Kushwaha as withdrawn upon the petitioner's request.

constitutional petition_dismissed Procedural writ petition withdrawal dismissal Union of India

Maj. Varun Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

09 Apr 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:2636-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a routine adjournment order of the Armed Forces Tribunal, reaffirming the limited scope of certiorari jurisdiction under Article 226.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant certiorari jurisdiction Armed Forces Tribunal Article 226 writ petition

Maj. Mitender Yadav v. Union of India and Ors.

09 Apr 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:2633-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a routine adjournment order of the Armed Forces Tribunal, reaffirming the limited scope of certiorari jurisdiction under Article 226.

administrative petition_dismissed writ jurisdiction certiorari Armed Forces Tribunal adjournment order

M/S. SINGH FINLEASE PVT. LTD. v. M/S. CHAND CLOTH HOUSE & ORS.

09 Apr 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:2728

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate loan repayment disputes arising from a valid arbitration clause, proceeding ex-parte due to respondents' non-appearance.

civil petition_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Sole Arbitrator appointment Loan Agreement

Visage Beauty and Healthcare Pvt Ltd v. Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.

09 Apr 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:2733

The Delhi High Court held that the time to file a counter statement in trademark opposition begins only upon actual receipt of the notice of opposition, setting aside the abandonment of the appellant's trademark application due to non-filing within the prescribed period.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 21(2) Trade Marks Rules, 2017 Rule 18

Kiran v. Pramod Kumar

09 Apr 2025 · Anup Jairam Bhambhani · 2025:DHC:2779

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging a partial decree for possession based on the appellant's admitted tenancy and upheld the trial court's reliance on her statement under Order X CPC and execution without notice under Order XXI Rule 22 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Order XII Rule 6 CPC Order X CPC statement admissions of fact partial decree

Madhuri Pandey; Jaijaimini Pandey v. Sohan Lal Pandey

09 Apr 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:2643

The Delhi High Court upheld the Family Court's maintenance award based on minimum wages due to lack of evidence of Respondent's higher income and dismissed the petition seeking enhancement.

family appeal_dismissed maintenance Section 125 Cr.P.C. income assessment minimum wages

Ashok Kumar Seth & Anr. v. Dr. Suraj Prakash Seth & Ors.

09 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:2515-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against an ex parte decree as barred by limitation, refusing to condone a 777-day delay despite Covid-19 pandemic exclusion.

civil appeal_dismissed condonation of delay ex parte decree Order IX Rule 13 CPC limitation period

National Council for Cement Building Materials v. Pardeep Kumar and Ors.

09 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:2514-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's order quashing recovery of alleged excess payments from retired employees without issuing a Show Cause Notice, emphasizing the need for due process despite prior undertakings.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Recovery of excess payment 7th Central Pay Commission Show Cause Notice Retiral benefits

Govt of NCT of Delhi v. Kavita

09 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:2590-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Government's petition and upheld the Tribunal's order directing reconsideration and appointment of a candidate with a valid EWS certificate despite initial non-submission due to COVID-19 lockdown.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant EWS certificate Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board appointment COVID-19 lockdown

Union of India and Ors v. Suresh Kumar Azad

09 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:2503-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order directing pension fixation including advance increments earned before retirement, ruling that revised policies cannot be applied retrospectively to affect vested pension rights despite retrospective promotions.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant pension fixation retrospective promotion advance increments vested rights