Delhi High Court
35,876 judgments
Adavya Projects Pvt Ltd v. Vishal Structurals Pvt Ltd
Delhi High Court held it has jurisdiction to appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act where part of cause of action arose in Delhi despite arbitration clause being silent on seat.
Indu Devi v. Indira Devi
The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal upholding that statements made on oath not to dispossess without due process are binding and appeals filed beyond limitation are non-maintainable.
Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Simplex Infrastructures Ltd.
The Delhi High Court granted an extension of the arbitral tribunal's mandate under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, allowing more time to pronounce the award due to complexities and pandemic-related delays.
IRCON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED v. HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD
The Delhi High Court extended the mandate of the arbitral tribunal in light of the Supreme Court's COVID-19 limitation suspension orders, allowing arbitration proceedings to continue beyond the original limitation period.
Ashok Kumar v. Jamia Millia Islamia and Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging delayed backdating of appointment and retrospective promotion on grounds of delay and laches, affirming that stale claims in service promotions are not entertained.
Paardarshita Public Welfare Foundation v. Commissioner, North Delhi Municipal Corporation
The Delhi High Court directed the North Delhi Municipal Corporation to expeditiously consider and decide a public grievance regarding obstruction of access to public gates caused by brick walls.
Sh. Ram Dhan v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld dismissal of a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. concerning an alleged fabricated Will, holding the dispute to be civil and emphasizing judicial discretion and procedural compliance in ordering police investigation.
Millennium City Expressways Private Limited v. National Highways Authority of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that after failed conciliation efforts, the petitioner was entitled to invoke arbitration and the Court appointed arbitrators to constitute the arbitral tribunal under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Yogendra Mittal v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a service rule, directing the petitioner to seek remedy before the Central Administrative Tribunal as per the Supreme Court's ruling in L. Chandra Kumar.
Adil Singh v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union's applications under Section 152 CPC seeking correction of a judgment on land acquisition compensation apportionment, holding that such applications cannot reopen settled substantive issues.
Adil Singh v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union's applications under Section 152 CPC seeking correction of its judgment on compensation apportionment, holding that such applications cannot re-open settled issues or modify final orders.
Yogendra Mittal v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition directing the petitioner to remove objections to his application for advancing the hearing before the Tribunal, emphasizing procedural compliance for expeditious adjudication.
Ashok Kumar v. D.T.C.
The Delhi High Court held that non-production of the enquiry officer does not vitiate a disciplinary enquiry if other evidence exists, quashed the removal of a workman for unproven misconduct, and awarded lump sum compensation in lieu of reinstatement due to superannuation.
Adil Singh v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union's application under Section 152 CPC seeking to alter the final judgment on land acquisition compensation, holding that such correction powers do not extend to revisiting settled substantive issues.
Smt. Shalini Goyal v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.
The Delhi High Court disposed of writ petitions challenging income tax demands as satisfied after the petitioner availed the Direct Tax Vivaad Se Vishwas Scheme and deposited the tax liability.
Dipti Purty @ Sunita v. State
Bail was refused to the petitioner in a commercial quantity opium trafficking case under the NDPS Act as she failed to establish reasonable grounds to believe she was not guilty, despite procedural and delay-related arguments.
Metro Transit Private Limited v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that the Lieutenant Governor's retrospective exemption from penalty on delayed road tax applies to all transporters, entitling the petitioner to refund of penalty paid despite the respondent's contrary classification.
Naveed Ummer Sheikh v. Narcotic Control Bureau
The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of a drug accused apprehended with commercial quantity of methamphetamine, holding that procedural issues and disputed evidence are to be examined at trial and the bar under Section 37 NDPS Act applies.
LAS Ground Force Pvt Ltd & Anr. v. Airports Authority of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the cancellation of a tender award by AAI due to the petitioners' failure to submit requisite bank guarantees on time, rejecting COVID-19 related force majeure claims and emphasizing limited judicial interference in commercial contract enforcement.
Vinod Agarwal & Anr. v. Frost International Ltd & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding appellants liable under the indemnity clause of the Share Purchase Agreement for Income Tax liabilities paid by the buyer company, affirming that fraud and control justify lifting the corporate veil and rejecting reliance on Section 19 of the Indian Contract Act.