Delhi High Court
92,849 judgments
Kailash Singh v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that an Army personnel who voluntarily forgoes promotion during a UN Mission tenure cannot be denied deployment due to interim promotion, quashing the order removing him from the mission contingent.
Jagjivan Singh v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that a soldier who voluntarily foregoes promotion during UN Mission tenure cannot be denied deployment due to subsequent promotion caused by administrative delay.
Naimuddin & Ors. v. State & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed two cross FIRs arising from a family business dispute under Section 482 CrPC based on a genuine settlement, emphasizing the court's inherent power to prevent abuse of process in non-heinous offences.
Adiyta Gupta v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under multiple IPC sections arising from commercial disputes based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with conditions including payment of costs.
Khacher Mal Khan & Ors. v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 308, 452, and 506 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute based on a settlement between parties and the complainant's disinterest in prosecution, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Nasim v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 363 IPC based on an amicable family settlement and absence of prosecution support, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Parmeshwari & Ors. v. State & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act on the ground of amicable settlement and non-support of prosecution, relying on the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Rohan Kanhai v. Phool Chatrath
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition under Article 227 challenging eviction for nonpayment of rent, holding that failure to comply with rent deposit orders justifies striking off defence and eviction under the Delhi Rent Control Act.
Seema Singhal v. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board
The Delhi High Court held that in absence of rules permitting re-evaluation, subjective answer sheets cannot be re-evaluated, and the Kanpur University principle applies only to objective-type tests, dismissing the petition for re-evaluation of DSSSB exam answers.
Union of India v. Tara Chauhan
The Delhi High Court modified the CAT order on reservation for blind candidates in Northern Railways recruitment, upholding the 2013 committee's identification of posts and directing the Chief Commissioner of Disabilities to determine post equivalence.
Union of India & Ors. v. Tara Chauhan & Anr.
The Delhi High Court modified the CAT's order on reservation for blind candidates in Northern Railways recruitment, directing a reasoned determination of suitable posts by the Chief Commissioner for Disabilities and allowing blind candidates to apply pending finalization.
Union of India v. Tara Chauhan
The Delhi High Court modified the CAT order directing Northern Railways to reserve posts for blind candidates, holding that reservation must align with the 2013 Ministry notification and directing the Chief Commissioner for Disabilities to determine post equivalence.
Sonal Sharma & Anr v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court set aside charges against one sister-in-law for lack of involvement, upheld charges against others for cruelty and miscarriage, and directed inclusion of common intention under Section 34 IPC while rejecting charges for criminal breach of trust and grievous hurt due to insufficient evidence.
Krishan Kumar v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that pay scale placement to correct an anomaly does not constitute a promotion and directed grant of second financial upgradation under the ACP scheme to the petitioner.
Surinder Bhardwaj v. State
The Delhi High Court quashed two FIRs under Sections 354, 186, 332, 34, and 353 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.
Surinder Bhardwaj v. State
The Delhi High Court quashed two FIRs and criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC based on an amicable settlement between parties in non-heinous offences, emphasizing the Court's inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.
Surinder Bhardwaj v. State
The Delhi High Court quashed FIRs under Sections 354, 186, 332, 34, and 353 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC, emphasizing that such power is to be exercised sparingly and considering the nature of offence and stage of proceedings.
Surinder Bhardwaj v. State
The Delhi High Court quashed FIRs under Sections 354, 186, 332, 34, and 353 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, applying the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.
Anil Kumar Batla and Anr. v. Allahabad Bank and Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the setting aside of a SARFAESI Act sale due to non-compliance with mandatory newspaper circulation requirements, directing refund of sale proceeds to auction purchasers.
Kumar Aluminium Limited v. Asset Reconstruction Company India Limited
The Delhi High Court upheld the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal's refusal to refund a consolidated pre-deposit under the SARFAESI Act, holding that the appellant cannot retract a prior concession regarding the deposit amount.