Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Pahlado & Ors v. The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors
The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking direction to initiate criminal proceedings as premature and directed the petitioners to approach the trial Court for release of seized goods.
Yogender and Ors v. Union of India and Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging denial of OBC reservation benefits to Jatt community candidates post Supreme Court ruling, granting liberty to file fresh petitions on unfilled SC/ST vacancy diversion.
Anita Devi v. C M Kacharoo
The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw contempt petitions with liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.
Geetu Gujral v. State (N.C.T of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners accused of assaulting police personnel, considering their cooperation in investigation and interim protection already granted.
Vijay Kumar v. State; Sudesh Kumar v. State
The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to accused in a sexual assault case after DNA evidence excluded them as biological fathers, emphasizing consideration of all facts and possibility of false implication.
Soni Dave v. M/S Trans Asian Industries Expositions Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that landlord-tenant suits for ejectment do not qualify as commercial disputes under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 when the property is not used exclusively in trade or commerce and the valuation for jurisdiction must follow rental value under the Court Fees Act, ordering transfer of the suits to the District Judge.
Staar Surgical Company v. Polymer Technologies International & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's passing off suit against the defendants' trademark 'EYEPCL' for lack of deceptive similarity with 'ICL' in the context of surgical intraocular lenses, allowing summary dismissal of a suit without prima facie merit.
Rohit Jain & Anr v. Union of India and Ors
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid despite possession, directing payment of compensation under the 2013 Act even though the land was utilized.
Sardar Gurbax Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, granting relief to petitioners whose land acquisition award was not compensated.
Shabana Ali and Anr. v. Farman Ali @ Shahil
The Delhi High Court upheld the Family Court's order rejecting the recall of summons in a restitution of conjugal rights petition, holding that the existence of a Muslim marriage must be established through trial and evidence rather than summary dismissal.
Gaurav Kumar Bansal v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that the National and State Disaster Management Authorities must comply with their statutory duty to formulate guidelines for minimum standards of relief under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, and disposed of the PIL after respondents demonstrated progress in this regard.
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Prem Chand Sharma
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's quashing of delayed disciplinary proceedings and penalty imposed without prior communication of UPSC advice, emphasizing compliance with natural justice and expeditious inquiry.
MERCK KGAA & ANR v. PAWAN KUMAR JINDAL & ORS
The Delhi High Court accepted a voluntary out-of-court settlement under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC in a trademark infringement suit, decreeing the suit accordingly and disposing of the case.
Rajinder Kumar Gupta v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act pending for over five years without possession or compensation are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, regardless of court stay orders.
Suresh Kumar v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, without possession or compensation for over five years before the 2013 Act, are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
RANJEET CHAWLA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings pending for over five years without possession or compensation under the 1894 Act are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act.
Vinod Gugnani & Anr v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse if physical possession is not taken and compensation is not tendered to the landowner, applying Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
JAIPUR MARBLE STONE CORP v. LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings where possession was taken but compensation was unpaid before the 2013 Act are deemed lapsed, directing compensation payment under the 2013 Act without requiring land return.
Mahender Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is unpaid for five years, directing payment of compensation despite land utilization.
Dr. Rajesh Aeren v. State of NCT of Delhi
Anticipatory bail was refused to the accused in a multi-victim financial fraud case involving complex corporate transactions and diversion of investor funds, as custodial interrogation was deemed necessary for effective investigation.