Delhi High Court
58,912 judgments
Jagran Prakashan Ltd. v. Sh. Ram Jeevan Gupta
The Delhi High Court held that disputes involving questions of fact or law under the Working Journalists Act must be referred to the Labour Court under Section 17(2), setting aside the Deputy Labour Commissioner's recovery order passed under Section 17(1).
Jagran Prakashan Ltd. v. Jyoti Dhamija
The Delhi High Court held that disputes involving questions of fact or law under the Working Journalists Act must be referred to the Labour Court under Section 17(2), setting aside a recovery order passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner under Section 17(1).
Jagran Prakashan Ltd. v. Dileep Kumar Dwivedi
The Delhi High Court set aside a recovery order under the Working Journalists Act and directed the dispute to be referred to the Labour Court under Section 17(2) where disputed questions of fact or law exist.
Jagran Prakashan Ltd. v. Abhishek Rawat
The Delhi High Court held that disputed questions under the Working Journalists Act must be referred to the Labour Court under Section 17(2), quashing recovery orders passed without such reference.
Mr Kunal Tandon, Mr Chetan Roy, Ms Niti Jain, Advocates. v. INDUS POYFILMS SPECIALISTS PVT LTD & ORS .....
The High Court held that a secured creditor can enforce its security interest under the SARFAESI Act without seeking permission from the Company Court despite pending winding up proceedings, remanding the matter for fresh consideration accordingly.
Jagran Prakashan Limited v. Dhananjay Kumar
The Delhi High Court held that disputes under the Working Journalists Act involving questions of fact or law must be referred to the Labour Court under Section 17(2), setting aside a recovery order passed without such reference.
Om Prakash v. Anamika
The Delhi High Court allowed the appellant's appeal for recovery of possession based on prior possession despite lack of title, setting conditions for delayed execution of the decree.
Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd v. Sameer Seth & Anr
The Delhi High Court upheld a settlement-based compensation order, dismissing the appellant's appeal to enforce the entire decretal amount after respondents' partial payments and delay compensation.
Jay Kumar v. Sandeep Virmani & Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and refused condonation of a 1512-day delay, holding that unexplained and inordinate delay due to reliance on a deceased counsel does not constitute sufficient cause under the Limitation Act.
Ambience Developers & Infrastructure Pvt Ltd v. Punjab National Bank
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that pre-payment charges stipulated in the loan agreement are enforceable and commercial disputes are not maintainable as writ petitions.
M/S PAISALO DIGITAL LTD v. M/S JAY POLYCHEM (INDIA) LTD & ORS
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the arbitral award on loan quantum, holding that courts have limited scope to interfere with arbitral findings supported by evidence.
National Highway Authority of India v. M/S Gayatri Jhansi Roadways Ltd
The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award holding that a supplementary agreement indemnifying delay-related damages does not waive the concessionaire's right to bonus annuity payments under the original contract.
Veena Verma & Anr v. Parul Verma & Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal challenging the validity of a relinquishment deed, upholding the appellate court's decision and allowing the appellant lifetime residence rights without ownership or alienation rights.
Gulfam and Mustar Jahan v. State of Delhi
The Delhi High Court modified the appellants' conviction from culpable homicide to causing hurt, holding that death caused by assault on a person with pre-existing illness requires proof of intention or knowledge to cause death.
Union of India v. Partha P. Chattaraj
The Delhi High Court upheld interim contract renewals pursuant to a Tribunal order, subject to a pending Supreme Court appeal, preserving parties' rights to challenge subsequent actions.
Union of India & Anr. v. Jog Mohan Chhabra
The Delhi High Court corrected clerical errors in the judgment regarding the respondent's name and interest rate wording by issuing a corrigendum applicable to connected appeals.
Union of India & Anr. v. Jog Mohan Chhabra
The Delhi High Court corrected clerical errors in a judgment regarding the respondent's name and interest rates, directing uniform application of these corrections to connected appeals disposed of on the same date.
Union of India & Anr. v. Jog Mohan Chhabra
The Delhi High Court corrected clerical errors in a judgment regarding the respondent's name and interest rate terminology, issuing a corrigendum applicable to multiple connected appeals.
Union of India & Anr. v. Jog Mohan Chhabra
The Delhi High Court issued a corrigendum correcting the respondent's name and specifying 'per annum' alongside interest rates in its earlier judgment and connected appeals to ensure accuracy and consistency.
Union of India & Anr. v. Jog Mohan Chhabra
The Delhi High Court corrected clerical errors in the respondent's name and interest rate expression in a judgment and extended these corrections to all connected appeals disposed of on the same date.