Delhi High Court

58,104 judgments

Year:

Shri Ram v. National Capital Territory of Delhi

10 Apr 2018 · R.K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:2338

The High Court held that a party whose rights are affected must be impleaded in appeal proceedings and set aside the appellate order for non-joinder, directing a fresh hearing.

civil appeal_allowed Order 1 Rule 10 CPC necessary party impleadment Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC

Khalifa Chain Sukh v. Ajit Singh

10 Apr 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:2337

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal directing the tenant to deposit rent arrears and monthly rent under Section 15(2) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 pending eviction proceedings, holding that a tenant cannot occupy premises without paying rent once tenancy is admitted.

property appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 15(2) eviction tenant

Narcotics Control Bureau v. Saad Ansari & Ors.

10 Apr 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:2335

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a narcotics case due to procedural lapses and insufficient corroborative evidence under the NDPS Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant NDPS Act search and seizure Sections 41 and 42 NDPS Act charas recovery

Jagveeri & Anr v. Union of India

10 Apr 2018 · Najmi Waziri · 2018:DHC:2336

The Delhi High Court held that in railway accident deaths, strict liability applies and non-recovery of a ticket does not bar compensation to the deceased’s legal heirs.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railways Act, 1989 Section 124A strict liability railway accident compensation

Kailash Chand Jain v. State of NCT of Delhi

10 Apr 2018 · Anu Malhotra · 2018:DHC:2334
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is maintainable even after charge-sheet filing and granted bail to the petitioner on parity grounds with co-accused in a 1984 riots murder case.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC charge-sheet 1984 riots

Sudhir Vohra v. Council of Architecture & Ors.

10 Apr 2018 · Gita Mittal; C. Hari Shankar · 2018:DHC:2332-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a nomination to the Council of Architecture, holding that ex-post-facto concurrence by the Lt. Governor validates the nomination despite initial procedural irregularity.

administrative petition_dismissed nomination Council of Architecture Lt. Governor of Delhi ex-post-facto concurrence

Dharambir Singh v. Director of Education & Anr.

10 Apr 2018 · Siddharth Mridul; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:2333-DB

The Delhi High Court held that re-employment of retiring teachers in Government Aided Schools is a concession subject to fitness and vigilance clearance, and the Deputy Director of Education may overrule school-level clearance based on adverse records, dismissing the appellant's appeal against rejection of re-employment.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant re-employment Government Aided School vigilance clearance Deputy Director of Education

Container Corporation of India Ltd v. Titagarh Wagons Ltd.

10 Apr 2018 · Vibhu Bahkru · 2018:DHC:2312

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award excusing a 12-day delay under the force majeure clause and dismissed CONCOR's challenge to the liquidated damages deduction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 liquidated damages force majeure

M/S FANKAAR INTERIORS PVT LTD v. M/S DOONVALLEY TECHNOPOLIS PVT LTD

10 Apr 2018 · Yogesh Khanna · 2018:DHC:2309

The Delhi High Court held that admitted liability cannot be referred to arbitration and that filing applications before the court amounts to submission to its jurisdiction, dismissing the defendant's appeal and granting summary judgment to the plaintiff under Order 37 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order 37 CPC leave to defend arbitration agreement submission to jurisdiction

M/S CURRENT ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. v. M/S CEMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD

10 Apr 2018 · Yogesh Khanna · 2018:DHC:2310

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award in favor of the advertising agency, rejecting the respondent's objections including breach of contract and delay in award, and made the award the rule of the Court.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration Act, 1940 arbitral award subcontracting breach of contract

Union of India v. Ashok Kumar

10 Apr 2018 · Hima Kohli; Pratibha Rani · 2018:DHC:2328-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing promotion of an Income Tax officer whose criminal proceedings were closed and no disciplinary action was pending at the time of promotion consideration.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant promotion Departmental Promotion Committee vigilance clearance criminal prosecution

Oriflame India Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

10 Apr 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A. K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:2327-DB

The Delhi High Court remanded transfer pricing appeals for re-examination of the appropriateness of Modicare Limited as a comparable and directed proper adjustments and consideration of other comparables under Rule 10B of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.

tax appeal_allowed Significant transfer pricing comparable selection Modicare Limited Rule 10B Income Tax Rules

Delhi Development Authority v. K. R. Anand

10 Apr 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:2330
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court partially upheld an arbitral award on contract payment claims while setting aside compensation claims for breach of contract due to delays, emphasizing deference to arbitrator’s contract interpretation and limited grounds for interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

civil appeal_partially_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Contract interpretation Clause 10C escalation

NTPC LIMITED v. JINDAL ITF LIMITED & ANR.

10 Apr 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:2329

The Delhi High Court dismissed NTPC Limited’s appeal challenging the Arbitral Tribunal’s order directing payment of the second year’s Minimum Guaranteed Quantity under the contract, holding that payment obligations must be fulfilled before raising disputes and prior judicial decisions preclude re-agitation of the same issues.

commercial_arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 37 Minimum Guaranteed Quantity Force majeure

Oriflame India Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

10 Apr 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A. K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:2331-DB

Delhi High Court allowed Oriflame India's connected income tax appeals, referring to the reasoning in a related judgment ITA 811/2017.

tax appeal_allowed income tax appeals Delhi High Court Oriflame India Private Limited appeal allowed

THE STC EX-EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION v. THE STATE TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.

10 Apr 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:2325

The Delhi High Court directed the State Trading Corporation to respond to ex-employees' representation before enforcing Circulars revising medical benefits and restrained rejection of claims pending such response.

administrative other Procedural medical benefit scheme financial stringency administrative fairness representation

Urmila Verma v. Director of Education and Anr.

10 Apr 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:2326

The Delhi High Court directed reconsideration of a petitioner's claim for retrospective promotion benefits by requiring the respondent to pass a reasoned order on her representation, emphasizing procedural fairness in promotion cases.

administrative other Procedural retrospective promotion speaking order delay in promotion Delhi School Education Rules 1973

Upasana & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

10 Apr 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:2323

The Delhi High Court directed the respondent authority to consider and pass a speaking order on employees' representations seeking HRA and TA arrears within six weeks, ensuring procedural fairness and transparency.

administrative other House Rent Allowance Transport Allowance Regularization Sixth Pay Commission

Ankita v. IDBI Bank Ltd.

10 Apr 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:2322

The Delhi High Court directed the respondent bank to consider and pass a reasoned order on the petitioner’s representation challenging non-selection in recruitment.

administrative other recruitment non-selection representation speaking order

State Bank of India v. Devesh Kumar Sharma

10 Apr 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:2321

The Delhi High Court upheld an Industrial Tribunal Award directing SBI to absorb casual workmen after finding violations of Bipartite Settlements and mala fide selection practices, rejecting limitation and mala fide pleas.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Bipartite Settlement Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 absorption of workmen limitation