Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
DISNEY ENTERPRISES INC & ANR v. SWAPNIL JAIN & ORS
The Delhi High Court decreed a civil suit based on a voluntary out-of-court settlement recognizing plaintiffs' exclusive intellectual property rights and agreed legal costs.
Sanjeev Kumar & Ors. v. State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute based on a fully complied mediated settlement, emphasizing the court's power under Section 482 CrPC to end proceedings that would otherwise amount to abuse of process.
Rajinder Kumar v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that Article 35 of the Limitation Act does not apply to suits based on post-dated cheques issued as security for loans and set aside the dismissal of the suit on limitation grounds.
Ravinder Singh & Ors. v. The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC based on an amicable settlement, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.
Sandeep Verma & Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC based on an amicable settlement, reaffirming the cautious exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC in such cases.
Nishant Sharma & Ors. v. The State & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement, applying the principles of inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
Yogesh Chouhan & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement, applying the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.
Sanjeev Gupta v. State
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute based on an amicable settlement between the parties, applying the principles laid down by the Supreme Court for exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
Rajan Anand v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse if compensation is unpaid for over five years under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, and Ordinance amendments cannot retrospectively affect vested rights.
Surendra Singh Pental v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings pending without possession or compensation for over five years before the 2013 Act are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
Mahinder Sahai v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is unpaid for over five years, and that the 2015 Ordinance cannot retrospectively take away vested rights.
Rajesh Jain and Anr v. Union of India and Ors
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse if possession is not taken and compensation is not paid within five years, and mere deposit of compensation in court does not prevent lapse under the 2013 Act.
Ram Prakash Mittal and Ors v. Lt. Governer of Delhi & Ors
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings pending under the 1894 Act without possession or compensation for over five years are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
M.B. Mughal v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Anr.
The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition directing the petitioner to pursue recovery and related matters before the Financial Commissioner, holding that the society must provide accessible records notwithstanding police seizure of some documents.
Quadrant EPP Surlon India Ltd. v. Bagpet Industries Limited
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against rejection of revival and contempt petitions, holding that unconditional acceptance of settlement precludes revival and that appeals against contempt orders are maintainable only by punished persons.
Harish Relan v. Kaushal Kumari Relan & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that the suit challenging relinquishment and sale deeds was barred by limitation and that the amendment application seeking to introduce a new case was not maintainable.
Shankar Singh & Anr v. Union of India & Ors
The Delhi High Court held that eligible CRPF personnel must be granted second financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme after 24 years of service regardless of completion of pre-promotional courses if departmental failure prevented their attendance.
Dhiraj Ranjan v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that an ex-serviceman deputed as SI(JAM) in BSF is entitled to absorption in the same post on reemployment, rejecting BSF’s attempt to reduce his rank to ASI.
Surendra Pandey v. Commissioner, MCD and Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition for compensation for a child's death due to alleged municipal negligence, directing the petitioner to pursue a civil suit instead.
Indian Trade Promotion Organization v. Anil Kumar Khanna
The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT order dismissing recovery of alleged overpayment made to an employee based on bonafide pay fixation and after retirement.