Delhi High Court

65,510 judgments

Year:

Balwanti Devi and Ors. v. Land Acquisition Collector & Anr.

20 Dec 2017 · G. S. Sistani; V. Kameswar Rao · 2017:DHC:7948-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is neither paid nor deposited in court within five years prior to the Act's commencement, and deposit in government treasury is not equivalent to payment.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Section 24(2) 2013 Act Compensation payment Deposit in court

Ajis India Private Limited

20 Dec 2017 · Jayant Nath · 2017:DHC:7951

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition for voluntary winding up and dissolution of Ajis India Private Limited under Section 497 of the Companies Act, 1956 after finding all statutory compliances fulfilled.

corporate petition_allowed voluntary winding up Companies Act 1956 Section 497 Official Liquidator

Union of India and Anr. v. Dr. B N Mittal

20 Dec 2017 · Hima Kohli; Rekha Palli · 2017:DHC:7930-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition filed against a deceased respondent without impleading legal heirs, allowing withdrawal with liberty to file afresh after disposal of a pending Review Application before the Tribunal.

administrative petition_dismissed impleading legal heirs deceased respondent Review Application Tribunal proceedings

J.C. Bamford Excavators Limited & Anr. v. Bull Machines Pvt. Ltd.

20 Dec 2017 · Vibhu Bakru · 2017:DHC:7949

The Delhi High Court held that a suit alleging infringement of registered designs and copyright in technical drawings is maintainable despite withdrawal of interim relief and prior admissions, with key issues requiring trial.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant copyright infringement design registration Order VII Rule 11 CPC Order XII Rule 6 CPC

Jasmeet Kaur v. Navtej Singh

20 Dec 2017 · Manmohan · 2017:DHC:7931

The Delhi High Court held that anti-suit injunctions arising out of marital disputes and relating to custody fall exclusively within the Family Court's jurisdiction under the Family Courts Act, 1984, and transferred the suit accordingly.

civil other Significant anti-suit injunction Family Courts Act, 1984 jurisdiction marital relationship

Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. v. Jyoti Structures Ltd.

19 Dec 2017 · Yogesh Khanna · 2017:DHC:7915

The Delhi High Court allowed correction of a clerical error in its order under Sections 152 and 151 CPC to reflect the true intention of the court.

civil petition_allowed Section 152 CPC Section 151 CPC clerical error typographical error

Sushil Arora v. State

19 Dec 2017 · Gita Mittal; Sanjiv Khanna; R.K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:9123-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed appeals of Sushil Arora and Rajesh Pandey while dismissing others, affirming principles on conviction standards and sentencing modifications in criminal appeals.

criminal appeal_allowed and appeal_dismissed Significant criminal appeal conviction sentence modification appellate jurisdiction

Toleti Sreenivasakalyanan Chakravarthy and Anr. v. Ministry of Corporate Affairs and Anr.

19 Dec 2017 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2017:DHC:8653

The Delhi High Court allowed disqualified directors to withdraw their petitions with liberty to avail the Condonation of Delay Scheme, 2018, permitting temporary activation of DINs and setting conditions for participation even if their companies were struck off.

corporate appeal_dismissed Significant Condonation of Delay Scheme 2018 disqualified directors Director Identification Number (DIN) Companies Act 2013 Section 167(2)

Rajesh Ahuja v. Union of India & Anr

19 Dec 2017 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2017:DHC:8652

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking clarification on the CODS-2018, clarifying that no fresh prosecution arises against directors who avail of the scheme under Section 167(2) of the Companies Act, 2013.

corporate appeal_dismissed Condonation of Delay Scheme 2018 Companies Act 2013 Section 167(2) disqualified directors

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED v. DIGITAL CABLE NETWORK

19 Dec 2017 · MANMOHAN · 2017:DHC:7890

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and damages to the plaintiff music company against a cable network for unauthorized broadcasting of copyrighted works without license.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant copyright infringement permanent injunction damages public performance license

Wimpy International Ltd. v. Gulshan Dhingra

19 Dec 2017 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2017:DHC:7887

The Delhi High Court held that a suit based on an open, mutual, and current account with shifting balances is within limitation and maintainable by a sole proprietor who took over a partnership firm's liabilities.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant limitation open mutual current account reciprocal demands statement of account

Minakshi Singh v. Govt of NCT of Delhi

19 Dec 2017 · Sunil Gaur · 2017:DHC:7902

The Delhi High Court directed the Directorate of Education to consider the petitioner’s representation for promotion to PGT (English) based on her valid qualification and pass a speaking order, without deciding the merits.

administrative other Departmental Promotion Committee promotion valid qualification provisional degree

Neelima Kapoor v. The Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

19 Dec 2017 · Sunil Gaur · 2017:DHC:7906

The Delhi High Court directed the petitioner to submit a representation for recalculation of gratuity based on full service period and mandated the respondent school to decide it within a fixed timeframe in accordance with statutory provisions.

civil other gratuity service period Delhi School Education Act, 1973 Section 10(1)

Mahesh Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors

19 Dec 2017 · Vinod Goel · 2017:DHC:7883

The High Court dismissed the petition to transfer a dowry harassment case from a Magistrate to a Sessions Court for simultaneous trial with a murder case, but ordered transfer within the same court complex for convenience.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 407 CrPC transfer of criminal cases jurisdiction simultaneous trial

Dr. Sanjeev Kumar v. Medical Council of India and Anr.

19 Dec 2017 · Sunil Gaur · 2017:DHC:7905

The Delhi High Court directed the Medical Council of India to decide the petitioner's Representation within a stipulated timeframe with Oversight Committee approval, maintaining status quo on service conditions meanwhile.

administrative other Medical Council of India Representation Notification Oversight Committee

Sahil Singh Ravish v. University of Delhi & Ors.

19 Dec 2017 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A.K. Chawla · 2017:DHC:7904-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the University's mandatory 70% attendance rule for examinations, dismissing the appeal of a student whose results were withheld for non-compliance, while ordering a refund of fees.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant attendance requirement University examination admit card issuance Rule 8(a) Ordinance

Anil Kumar Ahuja v. Union of India & Ors.

19 Dec 2017 · Sunil Gaur · 2017:DHC:7903

The Delhi High Court directed the writ petition challenging partial implementation of a transfer order to be decided expeditiously by the Central Administrative Tribunal, recognizing the issue of equivalence of posts as a service matter within the tribunal's jurisdiction.

administrative other transfer order equivalence of posts service jurisprudence Central Administrative Tribunal

KSC CONSTRUCTION CO. v. UNION OF INDIA

19 Dec 2017 · Navin Chawla · 2017:DHC:7908
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under the arbitration agreement, holding that the court’s role under Section 11(6A) is limited to verifying the existence of an arbitration agreement, leaving disputes on arbitrability and merits to the arbitral tribunal.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6A) Appointment of arbitrator No Claim Certificate

NIIT Technologies Limited v. Directorate General, Border Security Force

19 Dec 2017 · Navin Chawla · 2017:DHC:7907

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act after the respondent failed to appoint one within a reasonable time, rejecting restrictive contractual clauses that would frustrate arbitration.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator arbitration agreement

Harkirat Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

19 Dec 2017 · G. S. Sistani; V. Kameswar Rao · 2017:DHC:7913-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings lapse if neither possession is taken nor compensation paid within the prescribed period under Section 24(2) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, relying on Supreme Court precedents.

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