Delhi High Court
31,024 judgments
SERVOTECH ELECTRICALS PVT LTD v. PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that the existence of a valid arbitration agreement and timely petition mandates such appointment even if one party fails to act.
Ms. Pinky Pawar v. Jagmohan
The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of dismissal orders against postal assistants, holding that dismissal based solely on uncorroborated handwriting expert evidence and denial of relevant documents violates natural justice.
Union of India & Ors. v. Sumit
The High Court upheld the Tribunal's quashing of the respondent's removal from service, holding that reliance solely on an uncorroborated handwriting expert report and failure to provide relevant documents and witnesses violated natural justice and rendered the disciplinary inquiry invalid.
Raj Kumar Roy v. Reserve Bank of India and Ors
The Delhi High Court set aside the classification of the petitioner's bank account as 'fraud' due to non-supply of material documents and lack of personal hearing, directing the bank to comply with natural justice and RBI guidelines before passing any further order.
Manish Kumar Sachar v. U.O.I & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that disciplinary authorities must provide the UPSC's advisory opinion to the delinquent employee before imposing punishment, following the earlier Supreme Court precedent, and quashed the impugned order for non-communication.
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission v. The Additional Director Directorate General of GST Intelligence
The Delhi High Court held that fees collected by electricity regulatory commissions in discharge of their statutory regulatory and quasi-judicial functions are not liable to GST under the CGST and IGST Acts.
M/S THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER CGST DELHI NORTH & ANR.
The Delhi High Court held that the GST liability on reinsurance services for the period 01.07.2017 to 24.01.2018 is regularized by the GST Council's circular and extended the benefit of such regularization to the petitioner despite earlier adverse orders.
Vijay Kumar Ojha v. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the defendant's belated objection to territorial jurisdiction, holding that failure to raise such objection before framing issues results in waiver under Section 21 CPC.
The Chairman, New Delhi Municipal Council v. Dr. G. S. Thind
The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of pension withdrawal proceedings under Rule 9(1) of the CCS (Pension) Rules against retired NDMC officers convicted of corruption, quashing the Tribunal's contrary findings.
Dr. Rahul Bhayana v. Dr. Rohit Bhayana & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, the court's role is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator, leaving issues of arbitrability and fraud to the arbitral tribunal.
M/S SRIRAM CABLES PVT. LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA
The Delhi High Court held that no fresh Section 21 notice is required before appointing a fresh arbitrator after an arbitral award is set aside due to unilateral appointment, and accordingly appointed a new arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Staff Selection Commission v. Darpan Sharma
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order directing evaluation of the respondent’s answer sheet despite a technical error in OMR coding, affirming that non-substantive procedural lapses should not bar meritorious candidates from public employment.
Laxmi Memorial Public School v. Suresch Chand Gupta
The Delhi High Court upheld the finding that Respondent 1 was an employee of the petitioner school and dismissed the Review Petition challenging this on the ground of overage, reaffirming the limited scope of judicial review under Article 226.
Commissioner of Police, Delhi v. Ravinder
Termination of a probationary police officer under Rule 5(1) of the TS Rules without a formal departmental inquiry is stigmatic and illegal, requiring adherence to natural justice principles.
EICORE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. v. EEXPEDISE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.
The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiffs to file additional documents discovered post-suit filing under Order XI Rule 1(5) CPC, while disallowing documents already in plaintiffs' possession without reasonable cause, emphasizing procedural compliance in commercial suits.
Benara Solar Private Limited v. Solar Energy Corporation of India Limited & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award denying contractual incentive for delayed project completion beyond six months, holding that no incentive is payable despite excusable delay and rejecting the petitioner’s plea of duress in accepting a revised incentive scheme.
Bumi Geo Engineering Ltd v. Ircon International Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that service of an arbitral award must be effected directly by the arbitrator to the party, and since valid service occurred only on 25 March 2017, the petition filed thereafter was within limitation.
Raghunath Singh v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order granting actual promotion benefits to the petitioner only from the date of the order, rejecting his claim for backdated actual benefits from 2003.
Delhi Transport Corporation v. Rajinder Kumar Modi
The Delhi High Court upheld that failure to opt out of the CPF scheme under the 1992 Office Order results in automatic switching to the Pension Scheme, entitling the employee to pension benefits.
DR REDDYS LABORATORIES LIMITED v. SMART LABORATORIES PVT LTD
The Delhi High Court granted interlocutory injunction to the plaintiff against the defendant's use of the deceptively similar trademark AZIWAKE, holding that urgent interim relief was justified and pre-institution mediation was not required under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act.