Delhi High Court
99,566 judgments
BRIJ KISHORE GUPTA v. UNION OF INDIA
The judgment in W.P.(C) 9192/2020 refers to the decision in W.P.(C) No. 98/2020 without providing substantive details.
Akshay Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that patent office employees are holders of civil posts amenable to the Central Administrative Tribunal's jurisdiction, and the writ petition seeking direct implementation of MFCS before the High Court is not maintainable.
Sudhirranjan Sahoo v. Union of India
The judgment in W.P.(C) 7655/2020 refers to the decision in W.P.(C) 98/2020 without providing substantive details.
Sanjay Kumar Sahoo v. Union of India
The judgment in W.P.(C) 7650/2020 refers to the decision in W.P.(C) 98/2020 without providing substantive details.
Col Anand Swaroop v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that an army officer awaiting confirmation of dismissal is entitled only to casual leave under Regulation 392, validating the cancellation of his Annual leave.
The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation - 2 v. Micro Focus Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that receipts from sale of software licenses by a UK company are not taxable as royalty under the India-UK DTAA, dismissing the Revenue's appeal against the ITAT order.
Manoj Kumar Singh v. Union of India
The judgment in W.P.(C) 7399/2020 refers to the decision in W.P.(C) 98/2020 without providing substantive details.
APECO INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA PVT LTD v. BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED
The Delhi High Court held that invocation of an unconditional bank guarantee cannot be stayed except in cases of egregious fraud or irretrievable injustice, and rejected the petitioner's plea to restrain encashment of the bank guarantee.
Sukanta Kumar Paul v. Union of India
The judgment in W.P.(C) 8169/2020 refers to the decision in W.P.(C) No. 98/2020 without providing substantive details.
Brijlal Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that denial of pro rata pension to Non-Commissioned Officers of the Indian Air Force under the 1987 Ministry of Defence circular is discriminatory and directed grant of pro rata pension to similarly situated petitioners.
AMIT PAUL v. UNION OF INDIA
The judgment in W.P.(C) 8027/2020 refers to the decision in W.P.(C) 98/2020 without providing substantive details.
Sandeep Kumar Katiyar v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court delivered a judgment in W.P.(C) 8335/2020, referring to the reasoning in W.P.(C) No.98/2020, without providing substantive details in the excerpt.
APECO INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA PVT LTD v. BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED
The Delhi High Court held that invocation of an unconditional bank guarantee cannot be stayed except in cases of egregious fraud or irretrievable injustice, and rejected the petitioner’s plea to restrain encashment of the bank guarantee.
Dharmendra Kumar Mishra v. Union of India
Judgment in W.P.(C) 7337/2020 delivered by Delhi High Court refers to the decision in W.P.(C) 98/2020 without detailing substantive facts or legal reasoning.
Deepak Joshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court disposed of W.P.(C) 7409/2020 by referring to the judgment in W.P.(C) 98/2020 without providing detailed reasons in the excerpt.