Delhi High Court

44,251 judgments

Year:

Mohd Usman v. Subhash Chand

09 Jan 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2020:DHC:131

The Delhi High Court dismissed the tenant's revision petition against eviction as withdrawn on the tenant's undertaking to vacate the premises by a specified date and pay use and occupation charges, staying execution of the eviction order accordingly.

property appeal_dismissed eviction Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) bona fide necessity

NIF Private Limited v. Registrar of Trade Marks

08 Jan 2019 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:8716

The Delhi High Court held that trademark rejection orders must be reasoned and provide an opportunity of hearing, quashing unreasoned orders and remanding the application for fresh consideration.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Rule 36(1) Trade Marks Rules, 2017 unreasoned order natural justice

Association of Technical Textiles Manufacturers and Processors v. Union of India

31 Dec 2018 · Yashwant Varma; Dharmesh Sharma · 2023:DHC:8216-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court quashed a TRU circular classifying polypropylene bags as plastics for lack of statutory authority, leaving classification to competent authorities.

tax petition_allowed Significant Tax Research Unit Section 168 CGST Act Customs Tariff Act classification polypropylene bags

Dr. Reddys Laboratories Limited v. Fast Cure Pharma and Anr.

23 Dec 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:7541

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition to cancel and remove the deceptively similar trademark “RAZOFAST” registered after the petitioner’s prior mark “RAZO” under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

intellectual_property petition_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 57 Section 11(1)(b) trademark infringement

Pondicherry University v. B.E. Billimoria & Co. Ltd

18 Dec 2018 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2020:DHC:1978

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award holding the contract termination illegal due to employer’s delays in drawings and payments, affirming contractor’s entitlement to payments and rejecting petitioner’s counterclaims.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award Contract termination Construction contract Delay attribution

Narender Kumar v. Union of India

12 Dec 2018 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:3160-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 8

The Delhi High Court set aside the Tribunal's dismissal of a disciplinary challenge for lack of merit consideration and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication on merits.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant disciplinary proceedings Central Civil Services Rules natural justice judicial review

Union of India v. Promila Sawhney

06 Dec 2018 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:5047-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 7

The Delhi High Court upheld the entitlement of a government employee to interest on delayed gratuity payment, affirming Tribunal jurisdiction and rejecting limitation and maintainability objections, while issuing notice on the rate and period of interest.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant gratuity interest on delayed payment terminal benefits Central Administrative Tribunal jurisdiction

Himangni Enterprises v. Kamaljeet Singh Ahluwalia

28 Nov 2018 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2021:DHC:2728

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order directing the appellant tenant to pay arrears of rent and use and occupation charges, rejecting the appellant's claim of agency and reliance on an unrelated MoU.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant lease deed landlord-tenant relationship arrears of rent use and occupation charges

Rakesh Kumar Sharma v. Mother Dairy Fruit & Vegetables Pvt Ltd

28 Nov 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:1375

An appeal filed on behalf of a missing litigant without his knowledge or authorization post-judgment is incompetent and must be dismissed.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant appeal authorization Vakalatnama missing litigant

A K v. S S K

27 Nov 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Jyoti Singh · 2019:DHC:6385-DB

The Delhi High Court held that judicial separation cannot be granted without first proving grounds for divorce and refused to condone delay in filing appeal due to insufficient cause.

family appeal_allowed Significant Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 13(1)(ia) Section 13A judicial separation

Soni v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Anr.

26 Nov 2018 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1510-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a candidate is bound by the social status declared in the latest application submitted for a recruitment process and cannot claim a different category declared in an earlier cancelled examination.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant social status declaration OBC category recruitment advertisement fresh application

State of West Bengal v. Mrs Vipasha Parul & Ors.

01 Nov 2018 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:389-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order allowing an Indian Forest Service officer's inter-cadre transfer on the ground of marriage, affirming that discretion lies with the officers and shortage of cadre officers is not a valid ground for denial.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant inter-cadre transfer Indian Forest Service Rule 5(2) Indian Forest Service (Cadre) Rules, 1966 marriage

Alubuild Engineers Pvt Ltd v. Neo Developers Pvt Ltd

08 Oct 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5715
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court appointed an independent arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, directing arbitration under DIAC, holding that unilateral appointment clauses are unworkable as per Supreme Court precedents.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 12(2) unilateral appointment of arbitrator

Shubhash Chandra & Ors. v. Commissioner, East Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

01 Oct 2018 · C. Hari Shankar; Amit Sharma · 2025:DHC:4447-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that long-serving daily wage Chowkidars engaged against sanctioned posts are entitled to regularization despite cutoff date policies, quashing the Tribunal's dismissal and directing their immediate regularization.

labor appeal_allowed Significant regularization daily wage employees leave substitute Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Veena Rani

28 Sep 2018 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:64-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the entitlement of a long-serving Assistant Teacher to MACP benefits despite procedural lapses in service book entries and absence of evidence of refusal of promotion.

labor petition_dismissed Significant Assured Career Progression Scheme Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme service book educational qualifications

Harish Kumar v. Union of India

28 Sep 2018 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1064-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner was directly employed by the respondent and quashing the Tribunal's dismissal of his claim based on unsubstantiated outsourcing.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant direct employment contractual employment outsourcing Central Administrative Tribunal

Rakesh Singh v. Delhi Transport Corporation

27 Sep 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Anup Jairam Bhambhani · 2019:DHC:4982-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's application for condonation of a 3395-day delay in filing an appeal, holding that financial hardship alone does not constitute sufficient cause under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay Section 5 Limitation Act 1963 sufficient cause financial hardship

Athira S. v. Union of India & Ors.

26 Sep 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:1635
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court held that a B.Sc. degree in Physics satisfies the broad eligibility criteria for admission to the M.Des. course and quashed the institute’s cancellation of the petitioner’s admission and withholding of her degree.

administrative petition_allowed Significant eligibility criteria admission cancellation provisional admission related programme

Rajat v. The Secretary, Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment Government of India

22 Sep 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:3631

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging admission stream changes due to the petitioner's suppression of facts and unclean hands, denying relief under Article 226.

constitutional petition_dismissed Article 226 writ petition suppression of facts clean hands doctrine

Saket Shukla & Anr. v. Santanu Roy & Anr.

21 Sep 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1754
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court allowed a petition under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration Act to appoint an arbitrator and prima facie included a non-signatory investor as a party to arbitration, holding insolvency proceedings do not bar jurisdiction.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(5) Section 21 notice Non-signatory party