Delhi High Court
92,849 judgments
Saraswati v. Angoori Devi thr. LRs
The Delhi High Court held that possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act cannot be claimed solely on an ex parte eviction decree against a fictitious tenant without proof of settled possession or legal rights, and set aside the trial court's decree accordingly.
Anil Sharma v. Poonam Sharma & Ors.
The High Court held that a civil suit judgment does not bind non-parties and set aside the trial court's order impleading persons whose rights in the suit property cannot be affected without their presence.
Mukul v. Kamruddin
The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a fatal motor accident claim by applying correct age-based multiplier, appropriate income valuation for a housewife, and increasing non-pecuniary damages for loss of consortium and love and affection.
M/S. ZILLION INFRAPROJECTS PVT. LTD. v. MATHER & PLATT PUMP SYSTEMS LTD. & ANR.
Execution of a decree can only be made against the judgment debtor or its legally recognized successor, and a scheme of arrangement binds the decree holder to execute against the proper entity.
Rajesh Kumar Sharma v. Ashok Kumar Mangla
The Delhi High Court set aside ex parte orders and decree passed without jurisdiction by the District Court after the suit was ordered to be heard by the High Court, allowing the petitioner's appeal under Article 227.
Hemant Jain v. Sidharth Jaju & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order setting aside an ex parte decree due to improper service, holding that service by publication is not proper service under CPC and Limitation Act provisions.
Mohd. Rafat v. Jamila Begum & Ors.
The court held that plaintiffs not party to an MOU are not required to value their suit based on that MOU for pecuniary jurisdiction or court fee purposes, dismissing the petitioner's challenge to suit valuation.
Veena Mahajan v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act where no compensation was paid and the award was over five years old, despite disputed possession.
Surender Tomar v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition of an admitted encroacher seeking to restrain government authorities from taking possession of land required for widening a major public road, emphasizing public interest and abuse of judicial process.
CIT v. M/s Bhagat Steel & Forging Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court upheld the deletion of addition of Rs. 90 lakhs by the CIT(A) and ITAT due to procedural defects in notice service and satisfactory explanation of investment source by the assessee, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.
Commissioner of Income Tax - IV, New Delhi v. Focus Exports Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court allowed the Revenue's appeal, restoring the addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act for unsubstantiated share subscription money, emphasizing the assessee's failure to prove identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions.
RAM KAUR v. Union of India and Ors
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, regardless of possession.
RAVI DUTT & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition under the 1894 Act lapses under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is unpaid for over five years, entitling the original owners to possession.
Dewan Harbhagwan Nanda (HUF) v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition under the 1894 Act lapses if compensation is unpaid for over five years before the 2013 Act, entitling the original owner to restoration of possession.
Satish Kumar Aggarwal & Ors v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years prior to the new Act's commencement.
KRISHNA GUPTA v. UNION OF INDIA
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition under the 1894 Act lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act where possession was not taken and compensation not paid within five years of the award.
Reemal Dass Dudeja v. Santosh Mehlawat
The Delhi High Court set aside the appellate order reducing rent to Rs.1,500/- per month, holding that disputed and unauthenticated rent receipts cannot override the lease agreement specifying Rs.4,500/- rent.
Suman Kumari v. Vijay Kumar Sharoha & Ors.
The High Court dismissed the petition challenging ex parte orders and striking off of defense due to non-filing of Written Statement, holding that negligence of counsel and false claims do not justify setting aside such orders.
Shobha Dhalla v. Krishna Luthra
The Delhi High Court upheld dismissal of a suit and referral of the entire property dispute to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, due to ambiguity in property demarcation and prior invocation of arbitration.
Jasvir Singh v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the non-evaluation of supplementary answer sheets in a recruitment exam, holding that the petitioner failed to comply with instructions and prove loss or non-evaluation of answer sheets.