Delhi High Court

99,566 judgments

Year:

Ritika Jain v. Union of India & Anr.

31 Aug 2020 · Jyoti Singh · 2020:DHC:2676
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that the cause of action arose entirely outside its jurisdiction at Noida, Uttar Pradesh.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction Article 226 cause of action sexual harassment

R. S. Gupta v. Govt. of NCTD & Ors.

31 Aug 2020 · Manmohan; Sanjeev Narula · 2020:DHC:2664-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the exemption of attendance records of other school staff under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, affirming the appellate authority's competence and denying disclosure absent larger public interest.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Right to Information Act Section 8(1)(j) personal information privacy

Rajesh Kumar Sharma v. C.B.I.

31 Aug 2020 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2020:DHC:2671

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Rajesh Kumar Sharma for conspiracy, forgery, and cheating involving fraudulent withdrawal of funds from RITES, relying on circumstantial evidence of his operation of bank accounts into which the funds were diverted.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant criminal conspiracy forgery cheating Prevention of Corruption Act

Subhash Chander v. Govt of India & Ors.

31 Aug 2020 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw; Asha Menon · 2020:DHC:2675-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court set aside the termination of an ex-serviceman appointed as Sub-Inspector in CISF, holding that his recognized graduation degree made him eligible for the post and ordering reinstatement with continuity of service.

service_law appeal_allowed Significant ex-servicemen recruitment Group B post eligibility deemed graduation certificate CPO Examination 2016

Sanjeev Kumar v. Amarjeet

31 Aug 2020 · Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. · 2020:DHC:2666

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the ejectment decree, holding that admitted tenancy and termination of month-to-month tenancy justified the decree under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC despite procedural objections.

civil appeal_dismissed ejectment landlord-tenant relationship Order 12 Rule 6 CPC Delhi Rent Control Act

Sunil Goel v. Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited

31 Aug 2020 · C. Hari Shankar · 2020:DHC:2669

The Delhi High Court held that pledged shares securing multiple cross-collateralized loans cannot be released solely on repayment of one loan, affirming lender's rights under group borrower and cross liability clauses.

civil petition_dismissed Significant pledged shares loan agreement cross collateralization group borrower’s dues

Cox and Kings Global Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

31 Aug 2020 · Navin Chawla · 2020:DHC:2672

The Delhi High Court restrained the Union of India from encashing third-party Bank Guarantees pending replacement by the contracting party, allowing retention until termination notice expiry.

administrative other Bank Guarantees Contractual obligations Extension Agreement Undertaking to Court

CHAQUE JOUR HR SERVICES PVT.LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

31 Aug 2020 · Manmohan; Sanjeev Narula · 2020:DHC:2663-DB

The Delhi High Court held that partial admission of Service Tax liability does not constitute quantification of entire tax dues before the relevant date, rendering the petitioner ineligible for settlement under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2020 Service Tax liability quantification of tax dues Finance Act, 2019

Shahjad v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

31 Aug 2020 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2020:DHC:2665

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner in a murder case due to lack of prima facie evidence connecting him to the offence and the purely circumstantial nature of the prosecution's case.

criminal appeal_allowed regular bail circumstantial evidence call detail records disclosure statement

Raj Kumar Sharma v. Sandeep Kumar

31 Aug 2020 · C. Hari Shankar
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that the registration of the "PIZZA GALLERIA" mark was deceptively similar to an earlier device mark application and ordered rectification with a geographic disclaimer restricting use in the district of Rewari.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 11(1)(b) Section 11(4) rectification

Rajnikant v. Union of India

31 Aug 2020 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:3286-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 11

The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to treat the writ petition as a representation and pass a reasoned order on the diversion of unfilled vacancies within six weeks, preserving the petitioner’s right to further challenge.

administrative other Procedural writ petition diversion of vacancies Assistant Commandant Engineer Sashastra Seema Bal

Future Coupons Private Limited & Ors. v. Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC & Anr.

29 Aug 2020 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022 SCC OnLine Del 3401
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court dismissed petitions challenging arbitral tribunal's interlocutory orders allowing claim amendment and rejecting termination, holding continuation of arbitration valid despite CCI order and insolvency moratorium.

arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 32(2)(c) Section 23(3) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Rajendra Prasad Sharma v. Union Public Service Commission & Ors.

28 Aug 2020 · Siddharth Mridul; Talwant Singh · 2020:DHC:2660-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Single Judge to first determine the maintainability and jurisdictional issues of a writ petition before proceeding to its merits.

constitutional appeal_allowed Letters Patent Appeal maintainability subject matter jurisdiction territorial jurisdiction

FERRARI ESTATES LLP v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

28 Aug 2020 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw; Asha Menon · 2020:DHC:2648-DB

The Delhi High Court heard a writ petition filed by Ferrari Estates LLP against the Union of India and others concerning administrative issues related to NHAI, delivering judgment on August 28, 2020.

administrative other writ petition National Highways Authority of India administrative law land acquisition

Purshotam Behl v. Union of India

28 Aug 2020 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw; Asha Menon · 2020:DHC:2645-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that under the National Highway Act, possession of land can be taken after vesting and partial compensation determination, even if compensation for structures is deferred to a supplementary award.

property appeal_dismissed Significant National Highway Act, 1956 Section 3G determination land acquisition compensation

Dr. Akshee Batra v. Union of India & Ors.

28 Aug 2020 · Jayant Nath · 2020:DHC:2655

The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitrary PG medical seat allotment due to failure to advertise vacancy and directed fresh counselling with due publicity, while protecting the bona fide interests of the candidate already admitted.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Stray Vacancy Round counselling MD Psychiatry admission advertisement of vacancies merit-based selection

Capt. Atul Chandra v. Air India Limited & Ors.

28 Aug 2020 · Jyoti Singh, J. · 2020:DHC:2661

The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner remained an Air India employee despite his contract appointment with DGCA, and Air India had jurisdiction to issue a chargesheet, refusing to stay disciplinary proceedings.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant employer-employee relationship deputation contract appointment disciplinary proceedings

Dr. Navroz Mehta v. Union of India & Anr

28 Aug 2020 · Jayant Nath · 2020:DHC:2651

A candidate already admitted to a PG medical course elsewhere is ineligible to participate in AFMS PG counselling and must produce original certificates as per the binding Information Bulletin rules.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant PG medical counselling Information Bulletin eligibility criteria original certificates

MEHUL CHOKSI ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Vijay Aggarwal, Mr.Naman Joshi, Mr.Tarun Singla, Mr.Mudit Jain, Mr.Ashul Aggarwal, Ms.Barkha Rastogi, Mr.Shailesh Pandey, Mr.Kunal Srivastava, Advs. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....

28 Aug 2020 · HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA 2020:DHC:2656; WP(C) No.567... · 2020:DHC:2656

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking regulation and pre-screening of a documentary on OTT platforms, holding that existing IT Act provisions suffice and private disputes over prejudicial content must be resolved through civil courts.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant OTT platform regulation Information Technology Act, 2000 pre-screening of content right to fair trial

Dalvinder Singh Sodhi v. Union of India & Ors.

28 Aug 2020 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw; Asha Menon · 2020:DHC:2646-DB

The provided text is only the cover page and case metadata of a Delhi High Court judgment dated 28 August 2020 without substantive content or reasoning.

other