Delhi High Court

65,687 judgments

Year:

Jagdish Prasad Shukla v. Emaar MGF Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

17 Jan 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:469

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions challenging the appointment of a common arbitrator on grounds of alleged non-disclosure and ineligibility under the Fifth Schedule, holding such challenges are premature and must be raised post-award.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 Section 12 Section 13

Neeta Aggarwal v. Shashi Jindal

17 Jan 2018 · Siddharth Mridul; Deepa Sharma · 2018:DHC:479-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the limitation period for filing cross objections begins from the date of service of the memorandum of appeal, not from the respondent's appearance, and condoned delay in filing cross objections accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XLI CPC cross objections limitation period service of memorandum of appeal

Subhash Chandra Mishra v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Jan 2018 · Hima Kohli; Rekha Palli · 2018:DHC:480-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging disciplinary orders and belated appeals/revision petitions for being barred by unexplained delay and laches under the CISF Act.

administrative petition_dismissed disciplinary proceedings limitation delay and laches statutory appeal

JAIN RICELAND PVT LTD v. SAGAR OVERSEAS

17 Jan 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:478-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and decreed the suit by recording the parties' settlement restraining the respondent from using the trademark 'SWAAD', setting aside the impugned interim order.

civil appeal_allowed trademark infringement permanent injunction Order 39 CPC settlement agreement

Ramesh Chander Goel v. Daya Kishan Goel

17 Jan 2018 · Gita Mittal; C. Hari Shankar · 2018:DHC:448

The Delhi High Court set aside an order admitting non-compliant affidavit evidence, directed strict adherence to court orders on document admissibility, and encouraged mediation in a family business dispute.

civil appeal_allowed Significant affidavit evidence admissibility of documents court orders compliance civil suit

Madhur Jain v. Emaar MGF Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

17 Jan 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:467

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions challenging the appointment of a common arbitrator in multiple related VAT disputes, holding that challenges under the Fifth Schedule must be raised post-award and that such batch arbitrations do not attract disqualification.

arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 12 Section 13

Adhyapak Shakti Manch v. Govt of N.C.T. Delhi

17 Jan 2018 · Gita Mittal; C. Hari Shankar · 2018:DHC:449-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Government of NCT of Delhi to grant the minimum pay of Rs.17,140 as on 1st January 2006 to all trained graduate teachers appointed before that date, enforcing binding orders of the Tribunal and Supreme Court.

labor petition_allowed Significant Pay Fixation Rules 2008 trained graduate teachers minimum pay entitlement Central Administrative Tribunal

Mulanur Renewable Energy Private Limited v. Regen Powertech Private Ltd

17 Jan 2018 · Gita Mittal; C. Hari Shankar · 2018:DHC:450-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a party invoking an irrevocable bank guarantee is not required to give prior notice unless contractually stipulated, setting aside interim orders mandating such notice.

civil appeal_allowed Significant bank guarantee invocation Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act interim relief

Mulanur Renewable Energy Private Limited v. Regen Powertech Private Ltd

17 Jan 2018 · Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal; Mr. Justice C. Hari Shanka... · 2018:DHC:445-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside interim orders requiring prior notice before invocation of bank guarantees, holding that such notice is not mandated by contract or law.

civil appeal_allowed Significant bank guarantee invocation prior notice Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act

Mahindra Kumar Rohatgi v. Emaar MGF Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

17 Jan 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:463

The Delhi High Court held that challenges to an arbitrator’s appointment based on justifiable doubts under the Fifth Schedule must be decided by the arbitral tribunal first and dismissed petitions seeking substitution of a common arbitrator appointed in multiple related VAT disputes.

arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 Section 12 Section 13

Mulanur Renewable Energy Private Limited v. Regen Powertech Private Ltd

17 Jan 2018 · Gita Mittal; C. Hari Shankar · 2018:DHC:446-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a party is not required to issue prior notice before invoking an unconditional bank guarantee unless contractually stipulated, setting aside orders that mandated such notice.

civil appeal_allowed Significant bank guarantee invocation prior notice Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act

The Kangra Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. Seema Sharma

17 Jan 2018 · Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:447

The Delhi High Court upheld the Labour Court's finding that the disciplinary enquiry against the employee was unfair as the management failed to prove it through an independent witness, leading to dismissal of the petition challenging the enquiry's invalidation.

labor petition_dismissed Significant fair enquiry principles of natural justice Presenting Officer bias

Kamal Kumar Jain & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Jan 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:454-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if neither possession is taken nor compensation is paid or deposited in court.

property petition_allowed Significant land acquisition Section 24(2) 2013 Act compensation payment physical possession

Rinku Das v. State Govt of NCT Delhi & Anr

17 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:434

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking cancellation of bail granted to the respondent, holding that bail orders require compelling reasons for interference and court observations without evidence should not prejudice the trial.

criminal petition_dismissed bail cancellation of bail change in circumstances trial court observations

Saigal Holdings (P) Ltd & Anr. v. Asa Nand Khurana & Ors.

17 Jan 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:453

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's discretion to allow amendment of the plaint after trial commencement under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to include new allegations and reliefs, dismissing the petition challenging the amendment.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order VI Rule 17 CPC amendment of pleadings commencement of trial judicial discretion

Ran Singh v. Lilu Ram Thr Lrs

17 Jan 2018 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:452

The Delhi High Court set aside an eviction order under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, granting leave to defend where triable issues arose from alleged misrepresentation and agreements indicating transfer of property.

property appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) eviction bona fide need

Pawan Kumar v. State

17 Jan 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:457

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for sexual assault of a mentally incapacitated minor, relying on the victim's mother's testimony corroborated by medical and DNA evidence despite the victim's inability to testify.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act Section 164 Cr.P.C. sexual assault minor victim

Nancy Gill v. State of NCT of Delhi

17 Jan 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:456

The Delhi High Court dismissed anticipatory bail and quashing petitions, holding that the FIR under Section 420 IPC discloses a cognizable offence and warrants investigation.

criminal appeal_dismissed anticipatory bail quashing of FIR Section 420 IPC cheating

Nancy Gill v. State of NCT of Delhi

17 Jan 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:455

The Delhi High Court dismissed anticipatory bail and quashing petitions in a cheating case where the FIR disclosed a cognizable offence supported by prima facie evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed anticipatory bail quashing of FIR Section 420 IPC cheating

Dharam Pal v. Chairman Cum Managing Director Air India and Anr

17 Jan 2018 · Sunil Gaur · 2018:DHC:442
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that a de novo departmental inquiry against an employee already exonerated on the same charge violates the principle of double jeopardy and is impermissible under Air India Employees' Service Regulations.

administrative petition_allowed Significant double jeopardy departmental inquiry de novo inquiry Regulation 106 Air India Employees' Service Regulations