Delhi High Court
60,724 judgments
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI v. DR. P.K. RATHORE
The Delhi High Court held that the National Commission for Scheduled Caste lacks jurisdiction to issue binding directions in service matters, quashing its orders directing transfer and promotion of a government employee.
KAMLADLTYYA CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD & ANR. v. RAIL LAND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging termination of a railway redevelopment contract, holding that writ jurisdiction is limited in contractual disputes involving disputed facts and arbitration clauses, and the termination was not palpably arbitrary.
G.C. Srivastava v. Union of India and Ors
The Delhi High Court held that service as IAS officer and subsequent service as Vice-Chairman of CAT, separated by a gap, cannot be clubbed for gratuity calculation under the High Court Judges Act, 1954.
Nishant Muttreja & Sushant Muttreja v. State of NCT of Delhi
Delhi High Court granted bail to directors accused of economic offences after prolonged custody, emphasizing that magnitude of offence alone cannot deny bail when investigation is complete and no risk of tampering or flight exists.
Praveen Yadav and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that denial of House Rent Allowance to Group-A officers of BSF and CRPF, while granting it to PBORs, is discriminatory and directed extension of HRA benefits to all personnel irrespective of rank.
Sh. Govind Ram v. Sh. Sunny Chaudhary & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed revision to implead the Municipal Corporation of Delhi as a party in a suit concerning encroachment and unauthorized construction against a layout plan it approved.
Rameshwar Jha v. The Principal Richmond Global School & Ors.
Delhi High Court clarifies that the 25% EWS admission quota under the RTE Act is a minimum based on declared class strength, mandates compliance by private unaided schools, and affirms DoE's authority to enforce admissions.
Ayush Gupta & Anr. v. Sunil Chanana & Anr.
The Delhi High Court disposed of tenant-landlord appeals by enforcing a lawful settlement embodied in an MOU, setting aside the possession decree upon payment of a settlement amount.
Ayush Gupta & Anr. v. Sunil Chanana & Anr.
The Delhi High Court disposed of appeals by recording a lawful settlement between landlord and tenant parties, setting aside the possession decree subject to payment terms in the Memorandum of Understanding.
TDI Infrastructure Ltd. v. Col. Karan Bhagat
The Delhi High Court set aside a consumer commission's order directing deposit of the awarded amount without hearing the petitioner, emphasizing the requirement of procedural fairness akin to Order 41 Rule 5 CPC.
Ayush Gupta & Anr. v. Sunil Chanana & Ors.
Delhi High Court disposed of appeals by tenants challenging possession decree on the basis of a lawful settlement embodied in a Memorandum of Understanding, deferring execution subject to payment of settlement amount.
M/S VEDA SEED SCIENCES PVT LTD v. KOHINOOR SEED FIELDS INDIA PVT LTD
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal upholding an interim injunction against the appellant for trademark infringement, holding that prior acknowledgment of trademark ownership and deceptive similarity justified the relief despite the appellant's claims of prior use and registration.
Lt. Col Darya Singh Deswal v. Delhi Development Authority
The Delhi High Court held that the 1983 Building Bye Laws govern existing structures while the 2016 Bye Laws apply only to new construction, upheld the validity of DDA and DFS sanctions for additional construction in Ashoka Apartments, and dismissed the petitioners' challenge seeking to quash those sanctions.
Gian Chand Gupta v. Shashi Kumar Gupta & Anr.
The Delhi High Court directed maintenance of status quo regarding possession of property pending appeal under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, and ordered expeditious disposal of the appeal.
Praveen Garg v. High Court of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the constitutional validity of the continuous seven-year advocate practice requirement under Rule 9(2) of the Delhi Higher Judiciary Services Rules, aligning with Article 233(2) of the Constitution and Supreme Court precedents.
The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -1 v. Fujitsu America Inc.
The Delhi High Court upheld that Fujitsu America Inc. is the beneficial owner of fees received from its Indian subsidiary and entitled to treaty benefits under the India-USA DTAA, dismissing the revenue's appeal.
M/S AFFORDABLE INFRASTRUCTURE AND HOUSING PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED v. M/S SEGROW BIO TECHNICS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking interim injunction against termination of a lease, holding the lease as determinable and allowing termination but restrained the respondent from communicating with the petitioner’s sub-tenants pending arbitration.
MERCK SHARP AND DOHME CORP & ANR. v. YMS LABORATORIES PRIVATE LIMITED
The Delhi High Court decreed a patent infringement suit based on a mutual settlement where the defendant admitted patent validity and undertook to cease infringing activities, disposing of the suit accordingly.
SH UMESH KUMAR v. SH ABHAY RAJ PANDEY
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal seeking recovery from an unregistered chit fund, holding such contracts void under the Chit Funds Act, 1982 and emphasizing the necessity of prior sanction and documentary proof.
Harsha Soni v. Suraj Bhan
The Delhi High Court set aside an ex parte order passed without service of summons, emphasizing adjudication on merits and imposing costs for delay.