Delhi High Court

58,104 judgments

Year:

Bijender Singh v. Mukesh Gupta

08 May 2018 · Anu Malhotra · 2018:DHC:3003

The High Court held that refusal to send disputed documents for handwriting expert examination affecting the accused's right to defend is not an interlocutory order and is revisable under Section 397 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant handwriting expert examination interlocutory order revision petition Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act

G4S Facility Services India Pvt Ltd v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-1

08 May 2018 · Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:3004

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's discretion to require a 50% pre-deposit of provident fund dues before entertaining an appeal, emphasizing protection of workers' interests and limiting writ interference in interlocutory orders.

labor petition_dismissed Significant Employees Provident Fund Act Section 7-O pre-deposit basic wages

Raj Kumar & Anr. v. Manohar Lal & Anr.

08 May 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:3005

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's decree for possession due to lack of proof of payment and absence of a registered instrument transferring rights in the immovable property.

civil appeal_dismissed possession suit transfer of property registered instrument Registration Act 1908

Central Warehousing Corporation v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

08 May 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:3006

The Delhi High Court held that the insurance company failed to prove flooding damage prior to policy inception, entitling the plaintiff to recover the insured loss under the flood and fire insurance policy.

civil appeal_allowed Significant insurance claim flood damage concealment non-disclosure

Neeraj Kumar Uttam v. Union of India & Ors.

08 May 2018 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:2743-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 9

The Delhi High Court directed the CRPF to decide the petitioner's application for withdrawal of resignation under Rule 26(4) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, emphasizing that tentative file notings do not constitute binding acceptance.

administrative other Significant resignation acceptance file notings withdrawal of resignation Rule 26(4) CCS Pension Rules 1972

Mohd. Sajid v. Central Bank of India

07 May 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:9018

Delhi High Court directs Central Bank of India to grant leave encashment benefits to compulsorily retired employees with limited interest on arrears.

civil petition_allowed Significant compulsory retirement leave encashment interest on arrears writ petition

Lalit Puri v. Govt of NCT of Delhi

07 May 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:8459

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings arising from a family dispute based on a bona fide settlement between the parties and the complainant's decision not to pursue the case further.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR family dispute settlement criminal complaint

MD YUNUS v. MD ISHAQ & ORS.

07 May 2018 · Najmi Waziri · 2018:DHC:3001

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal, holding that the suit property allotted to a bachelor devolved upon his surviving siblings under Islamic law, and the appellant nephew/licensee had no right to possession.

civil appeal_dismissed Islamic law inheritance licensee rights Deed of Relinquishment succession

Smt. Bindu v. State & Anr.

07 May 2018 · Vipin Sanghi; P.S. Teji · 2018:DHC:3000-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the leave petition challenging acquittal in a murder case due to lack of evidence and inconsistencies in the prosecution's case.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 302 IPC poisoning murder reasonable doubt

XL ENERGY LIMITED v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LIMITED

07 May 2018 · JAYANT NATH, J. · 2018:DHC:2995

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award enforcing liquidated damages under an AMC, holding that such damages are payable as reasonable compensation even without proof of actual loss, and dismissed the petition challenging the award.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Liquidated damages Annual Maintenance Contract Novation

Pradeep Kumar Raghav v. Telecommunication Consultants India Ltd.

07 May 2018 · Siddharth Mridul; Deepa Sharma · 2018:DHC:2994-DB

The Delhi High Court held that termination of a purely contractual employment by a government enterprise is not amenable to specific enforcement or reinstatement absent statutory protections, and judicial review of such termination is limited to checking for arbitrariness or unreasonableness.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant contractual employment specific performance termination judicial review

Shiva Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I

07 May 2018 · Sanjiv Khanna; Chander Shekhar · 2018:DHC:2997-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the mandatory imposition of 100% penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act despite payment of disputed duty before adjudication, affirming that penalty liability arises once fraud or suppression is established.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 11AC Central Excise Act penalty fraud misrepresentation

Airport Authority of India v. Smith Detection (Asia Pacific) PTE. LTD.

07 May 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:2996

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award holding that in a lump sum contract, the contractor is not obliged to justify price breakup post-contract and dismissed the petitioner’s challenge to payment withholding and interest awarded.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant lump sum contract arbitral award contract interpretation withholding payment

Satish Builders v. Union of India

07 May 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:2993

The Delhi High Court held it has jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act despite the respondent’s objections and appointed a sole arbitrator after the respondent forfeited its right to appoint one.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 petition territorial jurisdiction appointment of arbitrator

Satish Khurana v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation

07 May 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A.K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:2992-DB

The Delhi High Court held that leasehold rights under valid leases cannot be extinguished by municipal policy without due legal process and remanded the matter for fresh examination of the MCD's authority and the effect of undertakings.

property remanded Significant leasehold rights Municipal Corporation of Delhi Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar forfeiture of lease

M/S Overnite Express Ltd. v. Seelam Kumari & Ors.

07 May 2018 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2018:DHC:2990

The Delhi High Court held that an unregistered long-term lease is treated as a month-to-month tenancy, limiting damages to agreed rent terms and dismissing claims for specific performance without evidence.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant unregistered lease month-to-month tenancy use and occupation charges termination of lease

Bhajinder Singh & Ors. v. Jaspal Singh & Ors.

07 May 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:2991

The Delhi High Court held that proceedings under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC cannot continue after dismissal of the suit and death of the alleged contemnor, as the interim injunction merges with the final decree and such proceedings against legal representatives are impermissible.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC interim injunction merger of interim order substitution of legal representatives

Kanwal Chaudhary v. Birender Chaudhary

07 May 2018 · R.K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:2989

The Delhi High Court allowed transfer of a civil suit to its original side for consolidation with a related partition suit, holding that interim orders on substitution and amendments do not conclusively decide locus standi.

civil appeal_allowed Procedural Order XXII Rule 3 CPC Order VI Rule 17 CPC Order VII Rule 11 CPC Section 24 CPC

Kanwal Chaudhary v. Birender Chaudhary

07 May 2018 · R.K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:2988

The Delhi High Court allowed transfer of a civil suit to be tried with a related partition suit, holding that interim procedural orders do not conclusively decide substantive issues like locus standi.

civil other substitution of parties Order XXII Rule 3 CPC amendment of pleadings Order VI Rule 17 CPC

M/S. INDIA OFFSET PRINTERS (P) LTD. v. DINESH PANDEY

07 May 2018 · Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:2987

The Delhi High Court upheld an ex-parte industrial award and dismissed the petition challenging it on grounds of unauthorized advocate appearance and delay, emphasizing that payment of back wages amounted to acceptance of the award.

labor petition_dismissed Significant ex-parte award Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Order IX Rule 13 CPC Section 151 CPC