Delhi High Court

48,408 judgments

Year:

Roshan Lal & Anr v. Shanker Gupta

10 Oct 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:5140

The Delhi High Court held that where a tenant raises triable issues disputing the landlord's bonafide necessity for eviction under the Delhi Rent Control Act, leave to defend must be granted and eviction cannot be ordered summarily.

property appeal_allowed Significant bonafide necessity eviction Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 leave to defend

Nanak Chand @ Nanak Ram v. Rajinder Kumar Ratawal

10 Oct 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:5141

The Delhi High Court allowed withdrawal of petition challenging eviction and stayed execution of eviction order subject to petitioners' undertaking to vacate premises by a specified date and pay use and occupation charges.

property appeal_allowed eviction Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) leave to defend

Veena Devi v. Container Corporation of India Ltd.

10 Oct 2019 · A.K. Chawla · 2019:DHC:5136

The Delhi High Court quashed a punitive transfer order issued without following disciplinary procedures, reaffirming that transfer orders cannot be used as a substitute for punishment.

service_law appeal_allowed Significant transfer order punitive transfer mala fide disciplinary procedure

The New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Chanan Singh

10 Oct 2019 · Najmi Waziri · 2019:DHC:5169

The Delhi High Court held that an insurer is entitled to recover compensation paid from the insured owner if the owner fails to produce required documents evidencing compliance with insurance policy conditions.

civil appeal_allowed Significant insurance policy breach right of recovery driving licence fitness certificate

Nitin Mavi & Ors v. State (Govt. of N.C.T of Delhi) & Anr

10 Oct 2019 · Suresh Kumar Kait · 2019:DHC:5135

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement between the married parties, holding that further prosecution would serve no useful purpose.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC Section 34 IPC

Parveen Gupta & Anr v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

10 Oct 2019 · Suresh Kumar Kait · 2019:DHC:5128

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR and all proceedings based on an amicable settlement between the parties and the complainant's withdrawal of prosecution.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR amicable settlement Section 482 CrPC inherent powers of High Court

Ashutosh Garg v. State & Anr.

10 Oct 2019 · Suresh Kumar Kait · 2019:DHC:5139

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR and all proceedings based on an amicable settlement between the parties and their consent to discontinue prosecution.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR amicable settlement Section 482 CrPC mediation

Suresh Chand v. Union of India and Ors.

10 Oct 2019 · G. S. Sistani; Anup Jairam Bhambhani · 2019:DHC:5138-DB

Delhi High Court directed the Central Administrative Tribunal to expeditiously hear the petitioner’s interim relief application against termination for non-fulfillment of recruitment conditions, emphasizing timely judicial intervention to protect livelihood.

administrative other Central Administrative Tribunal interim relief termination of service Ayurvedic Pharmacist recruitment

Pawan Kumar v. State

10 Oct 2019 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2019:DHC:5132

The Delhi High Court set aside the conviction under Section 354A IPC due to unreliable sole witness testimony and failure to comply with Section 313 CrPC procedural requirements.

criminal conviction_overturned Significant Section 354A IPC Section 313 CrPC sole witness testimony incriminating material

TCI Freight (A Division of Transport Corporation of India Limited) v. M/S Indian Oil Corporation Limited

10 Oct 2019 · Jyoti Singh, J. · 2019:DHC:5133

The Delhi High Court condoned delay in refiling an arbitration petition and directed the parties to resolve their contractual disputes through arbitration at DIAC, leaving limitation objections to the arbitrator.

civil appeal_allowed arbitration clause condonation of delay limitation objection Delhi International Arbitration Centre

Sushma Raina v. Canara Bank and Ors.

10 Oct 2019 · S. Muralidhar; Talwant Singh · 1994:DHC:5137-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the amended pre-deposit provisions of the RDDB & FI Act, 2016 do not apply retrospectively to appeals filed before the amendment, restoring the appellate tribunal's discretion to waive pre-deposit under the unamended law.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 Section 21 pre-deposit Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal amendment prospective operation

Yaman Kumar Sharma v. University of Delhi

10 Oct 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:5131
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the admission of candidates delayed by the University's fault in completing internship before the cut-off date, emphasizing fairness and merit over rigid adherence to administrative deadlines.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant AYUSH MD/MS Ayurveda admission compulsory internship eligibility criteria

Ombir & Anr v. Lt. Governor of NCT of Delhi & Chairman of Delhi Development Authority & Ors

10 Oct 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:5130
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the DDA cannot retrospectively limit the petitioners' vested right to three chances for alternative plot allotment under the 1961 Scheme and directed allotment accordingly.

property appeal_allowed Significant alternative plot allotment vested rights Delhi Development Authority Resolution No. 52/2004

Airports Authority of India v. Yashpal Singh Tanwar

10 Oct 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:5129

The High Court held that execution of an Industrial Tribunal award must adhere to its terms and be filed within limitation, quashing an order granting back wages from an earlier date and allowing a delayed execution petition.

labor petition_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 execution petition limitation back wages

Central Cottage Industries Corporation of India Ltd v. Employees State Insurance Corporation

10 Oct 2019 · R.K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:5172

The Delhi High Court held that the Employees Insurance Court has jurisdiction to decide disputes on the non-applicability of the ESI Act under Section 1(4) proviso, distinguishing it from exemption claims, and restored the appellant's petition for adjudication.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 Section 1(4) proviso Section 75 jurisdiction exemption under ESI Act

Itihad Motors Pvt Ltd v. Paras Dass Jain Charitable Trust

10 Oct 2019 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2019:DHC:5171

The Delhi High Court upheld dismissal of the application to set aside an ex-parte decree for failure to file within limitation and without condonation of delay, emphasizing the necessity of due diligence and timely action.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order IX Rule 13 CPC ex-parte decree condonation of delay limitation period

Neelam & Ors. v. Pradeep Birman & Ors.

10 Oct 2019 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2019:DHC:5173

The Delhi High Court dismissed the suit seeking declaration of share in ancestral property sale proceeds held in a joint bank account, holding that the plaintiffs cannot introduce a new plea of gift in replication and that the suit is barred by Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act due to a pending partition suit.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Hindu Succession Act Section 8 partition suit gift

Sanraj Farms Private Limited v. Charan Singh & Another

10 Oct 2019 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2019:DHC:5174

The Delhi High Court held that land notified under the 2013 Master Plan modification ceased to be governed by the Delhi Land Reforms Act, allowing a suit for partition in Civil Court and decreeing partition by metes and bounds as per agreement.

property appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 Delhi Development Act, 1957 Master Plan for Delhi-2021 Section 185 bar

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI v. KRISHAN KUMAR

10 Oct 2019 · JAYANT NATH · 2019:DHC:5170

The Delhi High Court held that the Central Information Commission cannot direct possession of property under the RTI Act and directed the petitioner to consider the respondent’s claim lawfully based on submitted documents.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Right to Information Act, 2005 Central Information Commission possession of property 20 Point Programme

Delhi State Electricity Workers Union v. Government of NCT of Delhi

10 Oct 2019 · Rekha Palli · 2019:DHC:5134

The Delhi High Court held that the Registrar cannot refuse registration of trade union rule amendments solely due to delay in communication and must consider imposing penalty instead.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Trade Unions Act, 1926 Section 28(3) Section 31 Central Trade Union Regulation, 1938