Delhi High Court

59,687 judgments

Year:

KRR Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

29 Oct 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:6966
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award on the ground that the arbitrator appointed after the 2015 Amendment was ineligible as a serving employee of a party, affirming that such appointments violate Section 12(5) and render awards void ab initio.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 Section 12(5) Seventh Schedule

Savitur Prasad v. UOI & Ors.

29 Oct 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:6967

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's dismissal of a criminal application under Section 340 CrPC seeking proceedings for alleged falsehood in promotion eligibility lists, holding no inquiry is mandatory and no prima facie case was made out.

administrative appeal_dismissed Section 340 CrPC false affidavit promotion claim zone of consideration

Orion Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr. v. State & Ors.

29 Oct 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:6968

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the revisional court's direction to investigate a complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC, affirming the applicability of Lalita Kumari and rejecting the claim of impermissible second FIR.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 156(3) CrPC Lalita Kumari Second FIR Section 482 CrPC

Farhana v. State & Ors.

29 Oct 2018 · Siddharth Mridul; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:6969-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of a Habeas Corpus petition seeking custody of a missing minor child, holding that police efforts complied with law and the petitioner must pursue Family Court remedies.

family other Habeas Corpus custody minor child Family Court

M/S INTER IKEA SYSTEMS B V v. QUESS CORP LIMITED

29 Oct 2018 · Najmi Waziri · 2018:DHC:6974

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal seeking injunction against the respondent's registered mark 'IKYA', holding no infringement or confusion with appellant's 'IKEA' mark due to distinctiveness, different business fields, and lack of use in India.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant Trade Marks Act 1999 interlocutory injunction trademark infringement phonetic similarity

University of Delhi v. Union of India & Ors.

29 Oct 2018 · The Chief Justice; V. Kameswar Rao · 2018:DHC:6937-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the University of Delhi's appeal and condonation application, holding that bureaucratic delay and procedural formalities do not constitute sufficient cause to condone a 916-day delay in filing an appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay sufficient cause limitation period public institution

Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies v. Govt. of NCT and Anr.

29 Oct 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A.K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:6964-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the constitutionality of the Delhi Professional Colleges Act's provisions regulating management quota admissions and fee fixation, affirming the State's power to impose reasonable restrictions on private unaided institutions to ensure merit, transparency, and educational excellence.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant management quota common entrance test qualifying examination Article 19(1)(g)

Dr. Sunil Puri v. Union of India and Anr.

29 Oct 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A.K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:6962-DB

The Delhi High Court held that refusal to accept registration applications of third-party clinics employing a doctor with a pending criminal case under the PNDT Act is unauthorized and violates procedural fairness, allowing the writ petition to set aside such refusals.

administrative petition_allowed Significant PNDT Act Rule 18A(4)(ii) registration refusal presumption of innocence

Director (Medical) Delhi v. M/S. Forsan Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.

29 Oct 2018 · Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:6973

The Delhi High Court held that an arbitration clause in a tender document is inapplicable where no contract is formed due to non-acceptance of the bid, dismissing the petitioners' challenge to the rejection of their arbitration application.

civil petition_dismissed Significant arbitration clause tender process contract formation Section 8 Arbitration and Conciliation Act

Hindustan Steel Works Construction v. Union of India

29 Oct 2018 · Chief Justice; V. Kameswar Rao, J. · 2018:DHC:6947-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging an arbitral award, holding that the award was a speaking one with proper application of mind and that judicial interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act is limited to exceptional cases.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral award Section 37 Arbitration Act Non-speaking award Judicial review

Munish Kumar Sharma v. Anmesh Kumar Rai

26 Oct 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:6886

The Delhi High Court dismissed the defendant's appeal in a loan recovery suit, holding that the defendant failed to prove repayment of the loan by credible evidence, thereby upholding the trial court's decree for recovery with interest.

civil appeal_dismissed loan recovery burden of proof repayment of loan documentary evidence

BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. v. Vineet Bajaj

26 Oct 2018 · Suresh Kumar Kait · 2018:DHC:8835

The Delhi High Court upheld the classification of an electricity connection as agricultural based on inspection reports and usage patterns, dismissing the petitioner's challenge to misuse charges.

administrative petition_dismissed Electricity Act, 2003 Delhi Electricity Supply Code Agricultural connection Tubewell irrigation

Vinod Kumar v. Government of N.C.T. of Delhi

26 Oct 2018 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2018:DHC:8805

The Delhi High Court directed DSIIDC to convert petitioners' industrial sheds from leasehold to freehold despite a dispute with DDA over conversion charges, holding the charges in a no-lien account pending final adjudication.

property petition_allowed Significant leasehold to freehold conversion conversion charges DSIIDC Delhi Development Authority

Sh. Rameshwar Dass & Anr. v. Sh. Bhawan Singh & Ors.

26 Oct 2018 · J. R. Midha · 2018:DHC:6932

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by allowing future prospects and increasing the multiplier while setting aside loss of love and affection following Supreme Court precedent.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation enhancement future prospects multiplier

Versatile Commotrade Pvt Ltd v. Adharshila Country Homes Pvt Ltd

26 Oct 2018 · Prathiba M. Singh

The Delhi High Court held that failure to obtain a No Objection Certificate within stipulated time entitles the buyer to refund of advance payment and that the seller cannot forfeit earnest money absent buyer's breach of payment obligations.

civil appeal_allowed Significant agreement to sell No Objection Certificate NOC advance payment

N.D SHARMA v. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA

26 Oct 2018 · Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:6928

The Delhi High Court directed the subordinate court to pronounce judgment within prescribed timelines under CPC and exercised its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 to ensure expeditious disposal of a delayed civil suit.

civil petition_allowed Significant Order XX Rule 1(1) CPC Article 227 Constitution of India timely pronouncement of judgment delay in judgment

Rama Rani v. State & Others

26 Oct 2018 · Manmohan J · 2018:DHC:6925

The Delhi High Court granted Letters of Administration with the Will annexed to the petitioner wife, holding the registered Will valid and uncontested by legal heirs.

property petition_allowed Letters of Administration Indian Succession Act, 1925 Will execution Attesting witnesses

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd v. Sudhira & Ors.

26 Oct 2018 · J.R. Midha · 2018:DHC:6926

The Delhi High Court allowed the insurer's appeal to reduce the compensation awarded in a motor accident claim by recalculating loss of dependency with future prospects and adjusting non-pecuniary damages as per Supreme Court guidelines.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation loss of dependency minimum wages

Dil Bahadur v. Arya Samaj Mandir

26 Oct 2018 · Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:6929

The court held that a Sevadar does not acquire any right in the property by long possession and upheld the order directing him to deposit monthly sums and vacate the premises upon retirement.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Sevadar mandatory injunction Order 39 Rule 10 CPC possession

M/S KANNU ADITYA INDIA LTD. v. STATE BANK OF INDIA

26 Oct 2018 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2018:DHC:6930
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that while a secured creditor must consider a borrower's representation under Section 13(3A) of the SARFAESI Act mandatorily, the 15-day period to communicate the decision is directory, and delay does not invalidate enforcement proceedings.

civil petition_dismissed Significant SARFAESI Act Section 13(3A) mandatory vs directory enforcement of security interest