Delhi High Court

27,673 judgments

Year:

Rajat Joon v. Rajinder Singh Joon

03 Feb 2010 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2023 SCC OnLine TS 4494
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court allowed an application by a non-party legal heir to lead evidence challenging a compromise decree on grounds of collusion and clarified the effect of adoption on inheritance rights under Section 12 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act.

civil other Significant compromise decree Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC locus standi collusion

Nitin Kumar v. M/S Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd

26 Oct 2009 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:1622

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal holding that gratuity is payable only after five years of continuous service under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and the suit claiming gratuity after two years’ service was barred by limitation.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Section 4(1) gratuity entitlement limitation period

Nitesh Kumar Singh; Laavanya Kaushik; Mohnish Sehrawat v. Babu Lal Meena

04 Aug 2009 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:688-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's condonation of delay in filing an OA for non-declaration of ST category results, holding that limitation did not commence as the cause of action persisted.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay limitation Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 Scheduled Tribe vacancies

Inderjeet Singh v. Kamala Nehru College & Ors.

11 Jul 2009 · Jyoti Singh · 2024:DHC:7079
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that a dissent based on erroneous eligibility criteria cannot invalidate a selection and quashed the direction to re-advertise, directing appointment as per the original merit list.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Selection Committee Assistant Professor appointment UGC Regulations 2018 Eligibility criteria

Sudhanshu and Ors v. Union of India and Anr

25 Jun 2009 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:2806-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 66

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioners' challenge to their exclusion from overseas deployment due to their promotion zone status, upholding the binding executive policy restricting such deployment.

administrative petition_dismissed deployment abroad promotion zone Promotion Cadre Course executive policy

GNCTD through Medical Director LNJP Hospital v. Beenu Pawar

03 Jun 2009 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:411-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing regularization of a long-serving casual lab technician despite her diploma being from a non-recognized institution, emphasizing fairness and continuous service over procedural technicalities.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant regularization casual employee Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology recognition of qualification

National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd v. V.D. Agro Tech Ltd

14 Apr 2009 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:6687

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 34 petitioner cannot introduce additional documents not before the arbitral tribunal to dispute factual findings unless exceptional circumstances exist, reaffirming the limited scope of evidence admissible in challenges to arbitral awards rendered before 30 August 2019.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 34 Arbitration Act additional evidence arbitral award challenge public policy

Punjab National Bank & Ors. v. S K Jain

11 Apr 2009 · C. Hari Shankar; Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:9679-DB
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of disciplinary proceedings against a bank officer due to failure to prove relied-upon documents through oral evidence, emphasizing the necessity of fair procedure in departmental inquiries.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings charge sheet list of witnesses proof of documents

Pandya Kushalbhai Ghanshyambhai & Ors. v. Indira Gandhi National Open University Maidan & Ors.

25 Mar 2009 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:4819

Delhi High Court directs IGNOU to grant two-year extension to B. Tech students under IGNOU-VIEP to clear backlog papers, holding denial violates Article 14 discrimination principles.

education petition_allowed Significant IGNOU-VIEP Registration Period Extension Article 14 face-to-face engineering courses

Akshem Chand through LR atlo Devi v. Suresh Bala & Ors.

18 Mar 2009 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:2157

The Delhi High Court dismissed a practicing advocate's application under Section 340 CrPC alleging fraud in a final civil judgment as an abuse of process, affirming that fraud allegations must be raised in original proceedings and imposing heavy costs to deter vexatious litigation.

civil petition_dismissed Significant abuse of process res judicata fraud on court Section 340 CrPC

Sarika v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board

20 Dec 2008 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1189-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the DSSSB's discretion to fix minimum qualifying marks for reserved category candidates and dismissed the petition challenging non-selection despite appearing in the merit list.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant DSSSB minimum qualifying marks reserved category selection process

Annabelle Analista Malibago v. DRI

16 Oct 2008 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:2063

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and 10-year sentence under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act, holding that minor procedural discrepancies do not undermine the consistent and corroborated prosecution evidence of heroin possession.

criminal appeal_dismissed NDPS Act Section 21(c) Section 67 NDPS contraband recovery

ITC Limited v. The Deputy Registrar of Trademarks and Ors.

29 Sep 2008 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:7863
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court restored ITC's trademark opposition and cancelled the registration of "LUCKY NINE" after holding that the opposition was wrongly treated as abandoned despite ITC's timely expression to rely on its grounds.

intellectual_property petition_allowed Significant trademark opposition notice of opposition evidence filing extension of time

G D Goenka Pvt Ltd v. Dinodia Educational Society

17 Sep 2008 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7401
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that the court first seized of a Section 9 application under Section 42 has exclusive jurisdiction over subsequent arbitration-related proceedings.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 42 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 territorial jurisdiction cause of action

Union of India v. Vinay Kumar

18 Aug 2008 · V. Kameswar Rao; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2023:DHC:9134-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 11

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order allowing deputation period to count towards residency for promotion under the Flexible Complementary Scheme, clarifying the applicability of the 2013 Rules excluding deputationists from FCS eligibility.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant deputation period absorption Flexible Complementary Scheme in-situ promotion

North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. R&T Enterprises

08 Aug 2008 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5771

Delhi High Court upheld arbitral award awarding compensation and interest to contractor for delayed site handover and payments by Municipal Corporation, dismissing challenge on limitation and evidentiary grounds.

civil petition_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement appointment of arbitrator limitation fundamental breach

Center for Research Planning and Action v. National Medicinal Plants Board Ministry of Ayush Government of India

09 Jul 2008 · Yashwant Varma; Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:15-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and reinstated the arbitral award, holding that judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is limited and the award by an expert arbitrator was not patently illegal or against public policy.

commercial_arbitration appeal_allowed Significant arbitral award Section 34 Arbitration Act patent illegality public policy of India

Bhagwan Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

31 Dec 2007 · V. Kameswar Rao; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2023:DHC:6287-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 4

The Delhi High Court held that a retired employee found fit by a DPC is entitled to notional promotion and pensionary benefits even if actual promotion is denied due to retirement before the DPC.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant notional promotion Departmental Promotion Committee retired employee pensionary benefits

Mr. Shivam Tiwari; Ms. Urmila Sharma; Ms. Deepika Kalra; Ms. Venni Kakkar v. OM PRAKASH

18 Dec 2007 · C. Hari Shankar; Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:76-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order directing payment of interest on delayed leave encashment benefits, holding that withholding such benefits requires a specific decision under Rule 39(3) CCS Leave Rules and that interest can be awarded for unreasonable delay even without statutory provision.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant leave encashment withholding pension disciplinary proceedings criminal conviction

Krishan Kumar & Anr v. Shakuntla Agency Pvt Ltd

22 Oct 2007 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5521

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging an arbitral award for specific performance, holding that the petitioners' failure to participate and raise objections during arbitration precluded reappreciation of facts under Section 34.

civil petition_dismissed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Specific performance Agreement to sell