Delhi High Court

93,075 judgments

Year:

Sushil Kumar Jain v. Union of India and Anr.

10 Nov 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:5821-DB

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition under the 1894 Act lapses if compensation is not paid within five years prior to the 2013 Act's commencement, declaring the petitioner's acquisition lapsed.

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

Ahmed Zia Khan & Ors. v. State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr

10 Nov 2014 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:5820

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes on the ground of an amicable settlement between the parties and the complainant's withdrawal of support, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR matrimonial disputes Section 498A IPC

Parveen Kataria v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

10 Nov 2014 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:5819

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 323, 406, and 420 IPC based on an amicable settlement between employer and employee, applying the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in line with Supreme Court precedents.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement non-compoundable offences

G.S. Chhabra v. Union of India & Ors

10 Nov 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:5818-DB
Cites 2 · 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 for over five years, regardless of physical possession.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 acquisition proceedings lapse compensation non-payment

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Rita Dutta

10 Nov 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vipin Sanghi · 2014:DHC:5841-DB

The Delhi High Court held that negligent conduct causing organizational harm amounts to misconduct and remanded the disciplinary enquiry for reconsideration due to procedural lapses.

administrative remanded Significant disciplinary enquiry negligent conduct misconduct Central Administrative Tribunal

Ajeet Singh Katiyar v. State

10 Nov 2014 · Pratibha Rani · 2014:DHC:5837

Delhi High Court upheld conviction for gang rape but reduced the sentence from 14 to 12 years, emphasizing judicious exercise of sentencing discretion under Section 376(2)(g) IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 376(2)(g) IPC gang rape quantum of sentence sentencing discretion

RAZZAK v. SH. DHARMENDER SINGH & ANR.

10 Nov 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5838

The High Court upheld the trial court's dismissal of an application to convert a possession suit into a title suit, holding that title disputes must be raised in a separate suit.

civil appeal_dismissed Article 227 Constitution of India Order I Rule 10 CPC possession suit title suit

Sh. Malkhan Singh v. Sh. Munazar Ali & Anr.

10 Nov 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5839

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition challenging the trial court's refusal to grant summary judgment in a possession suit, holding that clear pleadings and admissions are necessary to exclude the applicability of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Order XII Rule 6 CPC Section 115 CPC Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 possession suit

Greater Ashoka Land & Development Co. (P) Ltd. v. Karan Singh

10 Nov 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5840

The Delhi High Court upheld exclusion of the period spent in earlier arbitration-related litigation from limitation under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, dismissing the petition challenging the trial court's order.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 14 Limitation Act 1963 exclusion of time arbitration clause reference to arbitration

Rani v. Somnath

10 Nov 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5850

The Delhi High Court upheld a bonafide necessity eviction under the Delhi Rent Control Act, dismissing the tenant’s challenge and affirming the landlord’s genuine requirement of the premises.

property appeal_dismissed bonafide necessity eviction Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 leave to defend landlord-tenant relationship

Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Vinita Devi & Ors.

10 Nov 2014 · Jayant Nath · 2014:DHC:5861

The Delhi High Court partly allowed the insurer's appeal in a motor accident claim by correcting minimum wages, adjusting dependency deductions, upholding future prospects, and enhancing loss of consortium compensation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim loss of dependency minimum wages future prospects

Dalip Kumar Bakshi v. Vivek Khurana & Anr.

10 Nov 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5851

The Delhi High Court upheld eviction on bonafide necessity grounds, ruling that withdrawal of an earlier petition does not bar a fresh petition and that unsuitable alternative accommodation does not defeat eviction.

property appeal_dismissed Significant bonafide necessity eviction Delhi Rent Control Act 1958 Section 14(1)(e) alternative accommodation

Inder Mohan Singh & Ors. v. Sube Singh

10 Nov 2014 · J. R. Midha · 2014:DHC:5796

The Delhi High Court held that summary decree on admissions under Order XII Rule 6 CPC is inappropriate where disputed questions of fact and law exist, remanding a landlord-tenant possession suit for trial despite admissions and estoppel under Section 116 Indian Evidence Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC decree on admissions Section 116 Indian Evidence Act tenant estoppel

Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.

10 Nov 2014 · The Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:5835-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's application for interim relief against a CCI penalty order, holding that with the Competition Appellate Tribunal functional, interim relief that impairs its operation cannot be granted, emphasizing public interest and judicial discretion.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Competition Act, 2002 Competition Commission of India Competition Appellate Tribunal Article 14

Shridhar Gupta v. NDMC and Anr.

10 Nov 2014 · The Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:5793-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's intra-court appeal upholding eviction under the Public Premises Act, holding that prior dismissal of writ petition on license renewal bars re-litigation and unauthorized occupation justifies eviction.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 eviction license renewal unauthorized occupation

Raj Singh Dahiya v. Union of India & Anr.

10 Nov 2014 · Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:5794-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging GAIL's CNG price fixation, holding that judicial interference is unwarranted absent proof of arbitrariness or extraneous considerations.

administrative appeal_dismissed CNG price fixation executive discretion judicial interference arbitrariness

SH GHANSHYAM & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

10 Nov 2014 · THE CHIEF JUSTICE; RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW · 2014:DHC:5795-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Railway's authority to fix license fees under Commercial Circular No.51 of 2005, dismissed writ petitions challenging the same, and allowed appellants liberty to file fresh proceedings in light of subsequent policy developments.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant license fee fixation Railway catering contracts Commercial Circular No.51 of 2005 license termination

SH GHANSHYAM & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

10 Nov 2014 · Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J · 2014:DHC:5788-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Railways' authority to fix and demand license fees under Commercial Circular No.51 of 2005, dismissed writ petitions challenging it, and allowed appellants liberty to file fresh proceedings in light of subsequent policies.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant license fee catering contractors Railway Board Commercial Circular station classification

Govind Ram v. Government of NCT of Delhi

10 Nov 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:5830-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act due to non-payment of compensation within five years, granting the petitioner a declaration to that effect.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings non-payment of compensation

M/S CAPITAL LAND BUILDER PVT. LIMITED v. GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS

10 Nov 2014 · BADAR DURREZ AHMED; SIDDHARTH MRIDUL · 2014:DHC:5817-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings pending for over five years without compensation or possession under the 1894 Act are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, granting relief to the petitioner landowner.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings non-payment of compensation