Delhi High Court
93,075 judgments
Prabhat Sharma v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the MCD's authority to seize goods of a street vendor vending in a no-vending zone without a Certificate of Vending, dismissing the petition challenging the seizure as illegal.
Manju Yadav @ Richa Yadav v. Rajesh Yadav & Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the contempt petition, holding that belated but bona fide compliance with a settlement order does not constitute willful disobedience under the Contempt of Courts Act.
Vikash Mishra and Ors. v. The State GNCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under minor IPC offences on the ground of amicable settlement between parties, emphasizing the Court's power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in such cases.
Sameer Arshad Khatlani v. State and Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279, 337, and 338 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement and compensation paid, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process in a case of unintentional accident without gross negligence.
ABR EMERALD LLP v. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR & ANR.
The Delhi High Court held that a higher offer made post-auction by a non-participating party without depositing Earnest Money is not a valid ground to reopen or set aside a court-approved auction in company liquidation proceedings.
Delhi Development Authority v. Ashwani Khurana and Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the DDA's appeal challenging the setting aside of a revenue order under the Delhi Land Reforms Act on grounds of delay and laches, leaving substantive issues undecided.
State v. Rocky
The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court's bail order under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, ruling that interference with bail requires cogent grounds and no such grounds existed here.
Schlumberger Asia Service Ltd. v. Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited
The Delhi High Court held that New Delhi is the seat of arbitration and thus has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, rejecting the respondent's objection based on Dehradun being the seat.
Rahul Kashyap v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging anticipatory bail granted to accused in a minor family dispute under Sections 308 and 34 IPC, holding that custodial interrogation was unnecessary and bail was rightly granted.
Rocky & Ors v. State & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process.
Naveen v. The State NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a Section 498A IPC FIR following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuing proceedings would be an abuse of court process.
Paras Hans & Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and divorce between the parties, holding that continuing proceedings would be an abuse of the court process.
Dhruv Chawla v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL challenging government tender conditions for lack of maintainability, holding that only aggrieved parties can contest such tenders under Article 14.
Master Aansh Kandhari v. Rishi Kandhari & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the defendant's application to reject a partition suit filed by a minor, holding that the plaint disclosed a cause of action and factual disputes require evidence, not dismissal at the pleading stage.
Swastik Pipe Ltd v. Steelman Industries
The Delhi High Court allowed the petition for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, holding the petition was within limitation and the notice was properly served on the partnership firm.
Karan Luthra v. M.K. Subba
The Delhi High Court held that a suit for specific performance filed beyond three years from the date of accrual of cause of action under an Agreement to Sell is barred by limitation and liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
Shri Bhagwan v. The State & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted Letters of Administration with the Will annexed to the petitioner after holding the registered Will dated 14.02.2002 validly executed and genuine, rejecting objections of forgery, delay, and exclusion of heirs.
Sheetal Dhariwal v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the FSSAI to expeditiously decide the petitioner's representation enforcing the prohibition of tobacco and nicotine in food products under the 2011 Regulations after giving an opportunity of hearing.
Rashmi Goyal v. M/S Mahalaxmi Fabrics
The Delhi High Court held that a Company Secretary cannot be held vicariously liable under Section 141 NI Act without specific allegations of consent, connivance or neglect, and quashed criminal complaints against the petitioner accordingly.
Indiwar Parijat v. National Insurance Company Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a letters patent appeal challenging a Single Judge's order in a motor accident claim, holding that Section 100A CPC bars such appeals against first appeal judgments arising from special enactments.