Delhi High Court

99,506 judgments

Year:

Shivashish Shubham v. Union of India

06 Jan 2021 · Manmohan; Asha Menon · 2021:DHC:31-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Indian Air Force to grant pro rata pension and arrears with interest to petitioners similarly placed as in earlier judgments, subject to verification.

administrative petition_allowed Significant pro rata pension ex-servicemen pension arrears of pension verification of entitlement

Shivashish Shubham v. Union of India

06 Jan 2021 · Manmohan; Asha Menon · 2021:DHC:36-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Indian Air Force to verify and grant pro rata pension benefits with arrears to petitioners similarly placed as in earlier judgments, subject to verification and procedural safeguards.

service_law petition_allowed Significant pro rata pension ex-servicemen pension arrears verification

Nidhi Malik v. Union of India & Anr.

06 Jan 2021 · Manmohan J; Asha Menon J · 2021:DHC:29-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the authorities to decide the petitioner’s fresh transfer application within eight weeks, uninfluenced by earlier dismissal on limitation grounds.

administrative petition_allowed transfer of cadre Central Administrative Tribunal limitation fresh application

Anjali Bhargava and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr.

06 Jan 2021 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2021:DHC:44

The Delhi High Court held that directors disqualified prior to 7th May 2018 retain directorships in other companies and may have their DIN and DSC reactivated under the Companies Fresh Start Scheme, 2020 to enable compliance and fresh start.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant Director disqualification Companies Act 2013 Section 164 Section 167

Anant Narain & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.

06 Jan 2021 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2021:DHC:43

The Delhi High Court allowed reactivation of DIN and DSC for directors disqualified due to struck off companies under the CFSS-2020 scheme to enable fresh business activities.

corporate petition_allowed Significant Director disqualification DIN reactivation Digital Signature Certificate Companies Act 2013

EX CPL LALIT KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

06 Jan 2021 · Manmohan; Asha Menon · 2021:DHC:33-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Indian Air Force to grant pro rata pension and arrears to petitioners similarly placed as in earlier judgments, subject to verification, with interest payable on delayed payments.

administrative petition_allowed Significant pro rata pension pension arrears verification of entitlement No Objection Certificate

Sandeep alias Bhopali v. The State

06 Jan 2021 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2021:DHC:26

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition upholding the conviction and sentence under Sections 354 and 451 IPC for outraging the modesty of a woman and trespass, finding the prosecution evidence credible and intoxication no defense.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 354 IPC Section 451 IPC outraging modesty trespass

Savita Gupta v. India Post Payments Bank Limited

06 Jan 2021 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw; Sanjeev Narula · 2021:DHC:40-DB

The Delhi High Court held that an employee remains a probationer until formally confirmed, set aside her stigmatic termination for lack of inquiry, and granted back wages for the termination period while upholding the employer's right to verify eligibility post-appointment.

labor appeal_partly_allowed Significant probation confirmation termination back wages

Kalicharan @ Kalka Prasad v. The State (G.N.C.T. of Delhi)

06 Jan 2021 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2021:DHC:25

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellant for aggravated penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act based on credible complainant testimony despite absence of medical or forensic evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act aggravated penetrative sexual assault child sexual abuse Section 6 POCSO

Francis Joseph v. Government of NCT of Delhi

06 Jan 2021 · D. N. Patel; Jyoti Singh · 2021:DHC:46-DB

The Delhi High Court held that demolition orders must be preceded by giving the affected party an opportunity of hearing, modifying the impugned order accordingly.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant demolition encroachment natural justice opportunity of hearing

Union of India v. S P Singh

06 Jan 2021 · Manmohan; Asha Menon · 2021:DHC:30-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union of India's writ petition, holding that excess transport allowance paid due to non-functional upgrades without employee fraud should not be recovered.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant transport allowance non-functional upgrade excess payment recovery government employees

Abhimanyu Mor v. Union of India

06 Jan 2021 · Manmohan; Asha Menon · 2021:DHC:34-DB

The Delhi High Court held that while a Review Medical Board is discretionary, conflicting medical opinions warrant directing an RMB to reassess the petitioner’s fitness for service.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Review Medical Board Appeal Medical Board Right Renal Calculus Discretionary power

Mohammed Isham v. Union of India

06 Jan 2021 · Manmohan; Navin Chawla · 2022:DHC:79-DB

The Delhi High Court held that government employees not provided family accommodation are entitled to full HRA as per rules, directing payment of arrears with interest despite absence of outliving permission.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant House Rent Allowance HRA entitlement family accommodation CISF Rules 2001

GEO GPT JV v. POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD

05 Jan 2021 · C. Hari Shankar · 2021:DHC:23

The Delhi High Court granted an extension of time until 31st March 2021 to the Arbitral Tribunal to complete arbitration proceedings under Section 29A of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, on consent of the parties.

arbitration petition_allowed Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 29A extension of time Arbitral Tribunal

ICICI Bank Ltd v. Manish Goel & Ors.

05 Jan 2021 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2021:DHC:17

The Delhi High Court held that respondents wilfully disobeyed an injunction restraining them from sending emails against the petitioner bank, issued notice of contempt, and directed their personal appearance for further proceedings.

civil other contempt of court injunction order wilful disobedience restraint order

Pushpa Jhanji & Anr v. Pawan Chopra & Ors

05 Jan 2021 · Asha Menon · 2021 DHC 12

The Delhi High Court dismissed the contempt petition alleging violation of a consent order related to housing society membership and upheld the legality of eviction and sealing actions taken after due process.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Contempt of Court Consent Order Eviction Shivaji Co-operative Group Housing Society

Danish Khan @ Saahil v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

05 Jan 2021 · Anup Jairam Bhambhani · 2021:DHC:15

The Delhi High Court held that anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C. is maintainable and granted to the accused as no prima facie case under section 3(2)(v) of the SCST Act was made out, and the bar under section 18 of the Act did not apply.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail section 438 CrPC Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 section 3(2)(v) SCST Act

Rajan Bhandari & Anr v. Shriniwas Verma

05 Jan 2021 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2021:DHC:16

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the eviction decree passed under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC based on admitted tenancy and rent arrears, affirming the trial court's possession order.

civil petition_dismissed Order 12 Rule 6 CPC decree of possession landlord and tenant month-to-month tenancy

Vinay v. The State; Raj Tilak v. The State

05 Jan 2021 · Vibhu Bahkru · 2021:DHC:13

The Delhi High Court upheld the appellants' convictions for robbery and assault but reduced their sentence under Section 394 IPC to the period already served, ordering their immediate release.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant robbery assault outraging modesty identification

Vinay v. The State; Raj Tilak v. The State

05 Jan 2021 · Vibhu Bahkru · 2021:DHC:14

The Delhi High Court upheld the appellants' convictions for robbery and assault but reduced their sentences under Section 394 IPC to the period already served, considering mitigating factors.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant robbery assault outraging modesty Indian Penal Code