Delhi High Court
93,075 judgments
KAMALJEET SINGH & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Anupam Sharma, Advocate. v. STATE OF NCT DELHI .....
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, affirming the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to do so in such cases.
ROHIT @ RANJAN & ORS. .... Petitioners Through Mr. Banamali Shukla, Advocate with Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes on the basis of an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
BALASUBRAMANIAN RAMACHANDRAN v. For the
Reopening of income tax assessment beyond four years is invalid without a recorded reason showing failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment.
SPARSH PROPERTIES PVT. LTD v. For the
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is neither paid nor possession taken within five years, and mere deposit of compensation in court without prior offer does not amount to payment.
AMITA MEHTA v. For the
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the old Land Acquisition Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession is not taken or compensation not paid within five years, regardless of court stay orders.
ASHOK KUMAR MEHTA v. For the
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession was not taken and compensation not paid for over five years, regardless of court stay orders.
KEWAN KISHAN & ANR ..... Through Mr.Nikhil Malhotra, Advocate v. JASKARAN SINGH CHAWLA & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's finding of rash and negligent driving by the oil tanker driver without a valid license, dismissed the appellants' appeals, and enhanced compensation awarded to the claimants based on evidence.
Through Ms.Amita Gupta Adv v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..Defendants
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for injunction over disputed property in an unauthorized colony, holding it barred by res judicata and unsupported by valid ownership documents.
Mr. Amitabh Narayan, Adv. v. ASHOK GOEL & ORS. ......
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging the trial court’s refusal to allow a delayed amendment disputing ownership in a long-pending possession suit, emphasizing the need to prevent abuse of process and delay.
CRL.A. 297/2014 v. STATE
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Mohan Lal and Vicky for murder under common intention, rejecting their private defense claim despite minor injuries on accused, while affirming acquittal of co-accused due to lack of evidence.
CRL.A. 297/2014 v. STATE
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Mohan Lal and Vicky for the murder of Meena, rejecting their self-defense claim and affirming that unexplained minor injuries on accused do not negate prosecution's case when evidence is otherwise credible.
CRL.A. 297/2014 v. STATE
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Mohan Lal and Vicky for murder, holding that minor injuries on accused do not negate their guilt when evidence establishes their participation with common intention to kill.
Mr. Ravi Kumar Tomar & Mr. Bijan Kumar Singh, Advocates v. MANJU SHARMA .....
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order granting interim maintenance of ₹12,000 per month to the children and litigation costs to the respondent in a divorce proceeding under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
THDC INDIA LIMITED v. For the
The Delhi High Court held that DPC minutes containing personal information of employees are exempt from disclosure under the RTI Act unless public interest is established and mandatory procedural safeguards are followed.
Mr. L.S. Chaudhary, Mr. Ajay Chaudhary, Ms. Pratibha Gupta, Mr. Mahesh Tripathi & Ms. Ritu Gautam, Advocates v. MUZZAIYANA PARVEEN & ORS. .....
The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal upholding concurrent findings that appellants were mere licensees without title or investment proof, and held that pecuniary jurisdiction was not defeated by property valuation exceeding trial court limits.
Ms. Seema Gupta, Advocate v. PUSHPA RANI .....
The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal upholding that the appellant was a licensee, not a tenant, and affirmed the order directing him to vacate the suit property.
Mr. R.P. S. Bhagai, Advocate v. DARSHAN LAL & ORS. .....
The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal against the dismissal of a suit challenging a registered Sale Deed, holding that the suit was infructuous due to government acquisition and no substantial question of law arose.
Mr.Somnath Bhatri, Adv. v. THE GOVT. OF NCT OF DLEHI .....
The Delhi High Court dismissed bail for the accused in a white-collar cheating case, emphasizing the gravity of economic offences and the accused's absconding history despite trial delays.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI ..... Through Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. v. VALVOLINE CUMMINS LTD. .....
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, holding that reopening assessment requires valid reasons supported by material, and mere provisions in accounts without evidence of unascertained liability do not justify reassessment.
Ms. Tamali Wad and Mr. Yogendra Kumar, Advs. v. SMT. TULSAN DEVI DECD THRU LRS & ORS .....
The Delhi High Court held that a power of attorney given for consideration does not terminate upon the principal's death, and thus a consent order based on such power remains binding and cannot be recalled on a mere technicality.