Delhi High Court
92,628 judgments
Ravi Dutta v. Kiran Dutta
The High Court held that courts must consider the Domestic Incident Report before passing orders under Section 12 of the DV Act and quashed interim maintenance granted without a prima facie finding of domestic violence, remanding the matter for proper adjudication.
Sunil Aggarwal v. Dalip Singh
Civil courts lack jurisdiction to entertain suits challenging orders under the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, including possession claims under Section 26, and such matters must be decided by designated authorities within a reasonable time.
Manav Minocha v. Nistha @ Deeksha
The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court's order directing maintenance payment under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, emphasizing the need to consider actual disposable income and genuine dependency of the spouse.
Government of NCT of Delhi v. M/S. Nav Nirman Construction Co.
The Delhi High Court set aside part of an arbitral award for failure to provide reasons and modified the interest rate, while upholding other claims, emphasizing the necessity of reasoned awards and proper procedural compliance in arbitration.
M/S TITAGARH WAGONS LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
The Delhi High Court held that appellants not party to a writ petition challenging Railways' order were not necessary parties and dismissed their appeals against an interim order restraining Railways from placing certain wagon orders pending arbitration.
M/S TITAGARH WAGONS LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
The Delhi High Court held that appellants not impleaded in a writ petition challenging railway wagon supply orders were neither necessary nor proper parties and dismissed their appeals against the consent order referring the dispute to arbitration.
Ashwani Kumar Goel v. Income Tax Settlement Commission & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that the Income Tax Settlement Commission has jurisdiction to proceed with settlement applications even if the block assessment period is time barred, rejecting the petitioner’s limitation-based challenge.
Karan Agarwal v. M/S PRL Projects & Infrastructure Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that a company admitting debt and failing to pay after statutory notice, while raising a sham defence, is liable to be wound up under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956.
Ashok v. State NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court affirmed the appellant's conviction under Section 308/34 IPC but modified the sentence considering the time served and compensation offered to the victim.
Rashid @ Raju Mental v. The State of the NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction for attempt to murder based on credible injured witness testimony and medical evidence but reduced the sentence from ten to seven years' imprisonment.
Maulana Saleem v. Tamizan
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging a maintenance order due to unexplained delay of 197 days in filing the revision petition and upheld the maintenance awarded under Section 125 CrPC.
Tilak Raj v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the petitioner’s conviction for attempted cheating and forgery but modified the sentence on humanitarian grounds considering his advanced age and health.
Sheikh Azad v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Section 448 IPC but modified the sentence to the period already served, granting the petitioner release on account of mitigating factors and substantial incarceration already undergone.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Phool Kali & Ors.
The Delhi High Court partially allowed the insurance company's appeal by confirming 50% future prospects addition for a 19-year-old deceased and setting aside compensation for loss of consortium since the deceased was unmarried.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kajal & Ors.
The Delhi High Court partially allowed the insurance company's appeal by reducing certain heads of compensation while upholding the 50% addition for future prospects for a young deceased in a motor accident claim.
Jaimala & Ors. v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the claimants failed to prove the deceased was a bonafide passenger who died due to an untoward incident on the train, thereby upholding the dismissal of statutory compensation claims under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act.
Hari Chand v. Nagender Singh Panesar
The court held that a purchaser cannot claim exclusive ownership of joint family property purchased from one co-owner without proof of partition, dismissing the appeal.
Nawlesh Prasad & Anr. v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court upheld the Railway Claims Tribunal's dismissal of compensation claims for deaths ruled as suicide, clarifying that statutory compensation under the Railways Act, 1989 excludes deaths caused by self-inflicted injuries.
Union of India v. R.S. Makkar (Deceased) Thr Lrs & Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that claims not raised before the arbitrator cannot be introduced for the first time in objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Union of India through Divisional Railway Manager, Northern Railway v. Prem Devi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the imposition of interest and penalty on the Railway for delayed payment of compensation under the Employees’ Compensation Act, rejecting administrative delay as a sufficient cause.