Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Kirpal Singh v. Navdeep Kaur and Ors.

29 Apr 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2215

The Delhi High Court upheld eviction of a tenant by denying leave to defend where the landlord demonstrated bona fide residential need without suitable alternative accommodation.

property appeal_dismissed Significant eviction leave to defend bona fide requirement alternative accommodation

Sunil Goel & Others v. The State and Others

29 Apr 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2237-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed a delayed Section 6 land acquisition declaration issued beyond the statutory time limit, affirming that quashing does not reset the one-year period for acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 6 declaration Section 4 notification time limit

Sunil Goel & Others v. The State and Others

29 Apr 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2236-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 6 declaration issued beyond the prescribed period after quashing of an earlier declaration is invalid, affirming that no fresh one-year period is granted post-quashing under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 6 declaration Section 4 notification time period for acquisition

Sunil Goel & Others v. The State and Others

29 Apr 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2235-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 6 declaration issued beyond the prescribed one-year period after quashing of an earlier declaration is invalid, quashing the acquisition notifications and allowing the petitioners' writ petitions.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 6 declaration Section 4 notification time limit for acquisition

Vaishno Devi v. Suraj Bhan

29 Apr 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2233

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction order against the tenant, holding that the landlord's bonafide need was genuine and the tenant failed to raise any triable issue under Section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

property petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act Section 25-B leave to defend bonafide need

Sunil Goel & Others v. The State and Others

29 Apr 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2242-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 6 declaration issued beyond the statutory time limit after quashing of an earlier declaration is invalid, affirming that no fresh one-year period is granted post-quashing under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 6 declaration Section 4 notification time limit for acquisition

Sunil Goel & Others v. The State and Others

29 Apr 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2241-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 6 declaration issued beyond the statutory time limit after excluding court stay periods is invalid, quashing the acquisition notifications for the petitioners' lands.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 6 declaration Section 4 notification time limit

Sunil Goel & Others v. The State and Others

29 Apr 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2245-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 6 declaration issued beyond the statutory time limit after quashing of an earlier declaration is invalid, quashing the acquisition notification and allowing the writ petitions.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 6 declaration Section 4 notification time limit

Mahender Singh v. State

29 Apr 2014 · Ved Prakash Vaish · 2014:DHC:2225

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash an FIR under Section 326 IPC, holding that serious non-compoundable offences cannot be quashed merely on compromise between parties under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 326 IPC non-compoundable offence

Manoj Madhwan v. State NCT of Delhi

29 Apr 2014 · Ved Prakash Vaish · 2014:DHC:2226

The Delhi High Court held that only the registered owner or person in charge of a vehicle can be held liable under Section 5/181 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and quashed summons against an employee who was not the owner.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 5 Motor Vehicles Act liability of vehicle owner unauthorized driving Section 482 CrPC

Overnite Real Estate Private Limited v. BMC Properties Private Limited

29 Apr 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:2231

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between two companies under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, affirming the court's supervisory role and upholding the transfer of all liabilities to the transferee company.

corporate petition_allowed Significant Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Section 391 Section 394

Gurubachan Singh Sodhi v. M/S. HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

29 Apr 2014 · V.K. Shali, J. · 2014:DHC:2232

The Delhi High Court dismissed the landlord's appeal seeking direction for rent deposit, holding that rent liability depends on actual delivery of possession and no admission of rent liability was made to invoke Order 39 Rule 10 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order 39 Rule 10 CPC deposit of money lease termination possession delivery

Sunil Goel & Others v. The State and Others

29 Apr 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2240-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 6 declaration issued beyond the prescribed one-year period after quashing of an earlier declaration is invalid, affirming the binding precedent that no fresh one-year period is granted post-quashing.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 6 declaration Section 4 notification time limit for acquisition

Sunil Goel & Others v. The State and Others

29 Apr 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2234-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 6 declaration issued beyond the statutory time limit after quashing of an earlier declaration is invalid, affirming that no fresh one-year period is granted post-quashing under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 6 declaration Section 4 notification time limit for acquisition

Sunil Goel & Others v. The State and Others

29 Apr 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2238-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 6 declaration issued beyond the statutory period after quashing of an earlier declaration is invalid, quashing the acquisition notification and allowing the petitioners' writ petitions.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 6 declaration Section 4 notification time limit for acquisition

Sunil Goel & Others v. The State and Others

29 Apr 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2239-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 6 declaration issued beyond the statutory one-year period, after excluding court stay periods, is invalid, quashing the acquisition notification and upholding the principle from Padmasundara Rao.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 6 declaration Section 4 notification time limit for acquisition

Saleem @ Pinni v. State

29 Apr 2014 · V.K. Jain · 2014:DHC:2211

The Delhi High Court acquitted appellants accused of armed robbery due to failure of prosecution to prove recovery of stolen cash beyond reasonable doubt and absence of eyewitness identification.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant armed dacoity recovery of stolen property reasonable doubt eyewitness identification

Mool Chand Khairati Ram Trust v. Union of India

28 Apr 2014 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; R.V. EASWAR · 2014:DHC:2195-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that executive orders mandating free treatment for hospitals without statutory or contractual basis violate fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(g) and 300A and cannot be imposed unilaterally.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Article 19(1)(g) Article 300A free medical treatment lease deed conditions

Shri Mahender Singh & Ors. v. Shri Dharam Singh

28 Apr 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:2203

The Delhi High Court held that a female bhumidhar's life estate converts into an absolute estate under the Hindu Succession Act, validating her relinquishment deed despite prior restrictions under the Delhi Land Reforms Act.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 Hindu Succession Act, 1956 life estate absolute estate

Roop Singh v. Roshan Lal & Ors.

28 Apr 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:2205

The Delhi High Court allowed the second appeal holding that a family settlement exhibited without objection and signed by all parties is duly proved and binding, entitling the appellant to ownership and possession rights in the disputed property.

civil appeal_allowed Significant family settlement proof of document exhibition of document Hindu Undivided Family property