Delhi High Court

33,049 judgments

Year:

Union of India v. Vijay Kumar Saini

12 Mar 2020 · C. Hari Shankar; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:9245-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT order quashing recovery of excess increments from an employee retiring within one year, relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant recovery of excess payment Departmental Accounts Exam increment grant retirement

Nirankar v. Pawansut

26 Feb 2020 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:253

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal upholding concurrent findings that the appellant failed to prove any ownership interest in the suit property held solely in the respondent's name, affirming the bar under the Benami Transactions Act and limiting interference under Section 100 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Section 100 CPC Benami Transactions Prohibition Act concurrent findings of fact title to property

Commissioner of Police v. Yogesh Kumar

18 Feb 2020 · C. Hari Shankar; Amit Sharma · 2024:DHC:9055-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing compassionate appointment consideration without age disqualification where the application remained pending for years without consideration.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant compassionate appointment age bar Other Backward Classes Multi Tasking Staff

M/S Yogesh Chaudhary v. Oxyzo Financial Services Pvt Ltd & Anr.

14 Feb 2020 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7313
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court held that unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is impermissible and appointed an independent arbitrator to resolve disputes under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant arbitration agreement unilateral appointment arbitrator appointment Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Ajit Kumar Pande v. Union of India

12 Feb 2020 · SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA; SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD · 2022:DHC:4556-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that 10 years of practice as an Advocate cannot be counted towards pension qualifying service for a Member (Judicial) of the Railway Claims Tribunal appointed under the Rules of 1989.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant pension calculation qualifying service Railway Claims Tribunal practice as Advocate

Anita v. Commissioner of Police & Anr.

12 Feb 2020 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 286 (2022) DLT 553 (DB)
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the rejection of a police recruitment candidate whose acquittal was based on compromise, emphasizing the higher moral standards required for appointment to disciplined forces.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant compromise acquittal Section 320(8) CrPC police recruitment criminal antecedents

Major Anish Muralidhar v. Ram Pravesh Singh Yadav

07 Feb 2020 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:2631-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's order granting disability pension to a retired serviceman, affirming that ailments detected during service are presumed attributable to military service unless rebutted by clear reasons, and that the tribunal petition was maintainable despite no further representation after claim rejection.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant disability pension Armed Forces Tribunal Release Medical Board attribution of disease

BCC Developers and Promoters Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

05 Feb 2020 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:6768
Cites 2 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court has exclusive territorial jurisdiction over arbitration proceedings where Delhi is fixed as the arbitral seat, notwithstanding related proceedings in other courts or venues.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitral seat Venue of arbitration Territorial jurisdiction Section 20 Arbitration Act

Mr. Karthik Sood and Mr. Saksham Sethi v. Anshu

30 Jan 2020 · C. Hari Shankar; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:8794-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that cancellation of candidature without hearing violates natural justice and directed appointment of candidates pending investigation, while upholding the legality of appointments made in the interim.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant cancellation of candidature natural justice quasi-judicial body unfair means

APEX BUILDSYS LTD. v. VADERA INTERIORS AND EXTERIORS

09 Jan 2020 · C. Hari Shankar · MANU/DE/4418/2018

The Delhi High Court held that it can extend an arbitrator's mandate under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration Act even after expiry, rejecting objections based on abandonment, delay, jurisdiction, and liquidation bar.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 29A(4) Arbitration Act extension of arbitrator mandate arbitration proceedings liquidation Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code

INTERCONTINENTAL GREAT BRANDS LLC v. PARLE PRODUCT PRIVATE LIMITED

03 Jan 2020 · C. HARI SHANKAR · 2023:DHC:7974

The Delhi High Court held that without a prima facie tenable plea challenging the validity of a defendant's registered trademark, a plaintiff cannot invoke Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act to stay infringement proceedings or seek rectification.

intellectual_property petition_dismissed Significant Trade Marks Act 1999 Section 124 Section 30(2)(e) Trademark infringement

M/S AALOKIK ENTERPRISES PVT LTD v. M/S GYAN INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD

19 Dec 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5768
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator to resolve lease-related disputes, holding that only the respondent company, not its directors, is a proper party to the arbitration petition.

civil petition_allowed arbitration arbitration agreement appointment of arbitrator Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act

Mst. Lakshya v. Government of NCT of Delhi

16 Dec 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:285

The Delhi High Court directed a school to admit an EWS category student allotted a seat through the Directorate of Education’s draw of lots, affirming the student’s right to free education under the RTE Act.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant EWS quota Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 draw of lots admission

Raj Bahadur v. Union of India and Ors.

10 Dec 2019 · C. Hari Shankar; Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:9659-DB

The High Court held that retrospective promotion granted as per Tribunal directions precludes further interference under Article 226, and new promotion grievances must be raised before the Tribunal.

service_law petition_dismissed Significant Central Administrative Tribunal Departmental Promotion Committee retrospective promotion Annual Confidential Reports

Shivaji Chauhan v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi and Ors.

09 Dec 2019 · C. Hari Shankar; Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2024:DHC:7489-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to finalize the long-pending Recruitment Rules for the post of ACP (Programmer) within six months, addressing the petitioner’s grievance of delayed promotion and benefits.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Recruitment Rules Assistant Commissioner of Police Promotion Central Administrative Tribunal

Dayanand Pal v. Mr. Dharmender Kumar Bhati & Ors.

29 Nov 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:6891

The Delhi High Court appointed a substitute arbitrator under Sections 14(1)(a) and 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, directing continuation of arbitration proceedings from the stage of recusal.

civil other Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Substitute arbitrator Recusal of arbitrator Section 14(1)(a)

Dr Prasuna Chiluka v. National Board of Examinations & Anr.

25 Nov 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:4130
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

Delhi High Court quashed NBEMS’s cancellation of a doctor’s DrNB candidature for excess leave, holding that cancellation must be based on grounds stated in the order and that FAQs cannot impose binding liabilities beyond the Leave Rules.

administrative petition_allowed Significant DrNB candidature cancellation unauthorized absence leave rules FAQs binding nature

M/S GARG ENTERPRISES v. UNION OF INDIA

19 Nov 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7129
Cites 1 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition to refer disputes under a railway contract to arbitration, emphasizing a pragmatic approach over procedural technicalities and rejecting the respondent’s plea of accord and satisfaction as a merits issue.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 21 notice General Conditions of Contract

Nilkanth Das v. CBSE

08 Nov 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:94
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking correction of CBSE internal assessment marks, holding that CBSE Circulars prohibit any post-upload revision of marks, thereby upholding the finality of declared examination results.

administrative petition_dismissed CBSE internal assessment marks correction of marks finality of examination results CBSE Circulars

X v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

07 Nov 2019 · Navin Chawla · 2024:DHC:1141
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court set aside bail granted without serving notice and hearing the victim under the SC & ST Act, emphasizing mandatory compliance with victim's rights in bail proceedings.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant SC & ST Act Section 15A(3) Section 15A(5) bail