Delhi High Court

69,037 judgments

Year:

Sterlite Technologies Ltd v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd

30 Nov 2016 · S. Muralidhar · 2016:DHC:7715

The Delhi High Court held that disputes over the mode of computation of copper prices under a supply contract are arbitrable and appointed a substitute arbitrator after BSNL failed to do so.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitrability arbitration clause price computation copper price circular

Chitra Sharma v. Airline Allied Services Ltd. & Ors.

30 Nov 2016 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:7714

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking continuation of contractual employment, holding that absence without sanctioned medical leave constitutes indiscipline justifying termination.

labor petition_dismissed contractual employment medical leave indiscipline absence without leave

Mohd. Anwar v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

30 Nov 2016 · P. S. Teji · 2016:DHC:7712

The Delhi High Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application of a disabled accused with a criminal history who was absconding and alleged to have instigated his sons to commit assault and extortion.

criminal appeal_dismissed anticipatory bail Section 438 Cr.P.C. extortion instigation to kill

Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Kamal Dev Singh & Ors.

30 Nov 2016 · J.R. Midha · 2016:DHC:7752

The Delhi High Court remanded the compensation claim for fresh determination of whether the deceased driver died due to an accident involving the insured vehicle or an unknown vehicle, emphasizing absolute liability of employer and insurer under the Employees’ Compensation Act.

labor remanded Significant Employees’ Compensation Act insurance liability recovery rights insured vehicle

Palika Youth Street Vendors Welfare Society v. Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors

30 Nov 2016 · G. S. Sistani; Vinod Goel · 2016:DHC:7755-DB

The Delhi High Court directed NDMC to comply with Section 19 of the Street Vendors Act, 2014, mandating preparation and issuance of inventories of seized goods to street vendors to protect their rights and livelihood.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Street Vendors Act 2014 Seizure of goods Inventory of seized goods New Delhi Municipal Council Act

Bhagwati Prasad & Another v. Union of India & Others

30 Nov 2016 · G. S. Sistani; Vinod Goel · 2016:DHC:7756-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal's dismissal of the petitioners' claim for pay parity, affirming that pay fixation is the domain of expert bodies and equal pay claims require substantial identity of posts.

service_law petition_dismissed Significant Equal Pay for Equal Work Central Pay Commission Pay Scale Fixation Administrative Tribunal

Atul Sood v. Delhi Police & Anr.

30 Nov 2016 · Sanjiv Khanna; Chander Shekhar · 2016:DHC:7754-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the penalty of censure imposed on a police officer for failure to maintain proper criminal records, holding that the punishment was proportionate and not liable to judicial interference.

administrative petition_dismissed disciplinary penalty penalty of censure proportionality judicial review

U. Rai Arya v. Union of India and Anr.

30 Nov 2016 · Sanjiv Khanna; Chander Shekhar · 2016:DHC:7753-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal's order directing payment of 9% simple interest on delayed retirement benefits, rejecting the petitioner's claim for higher compounded interest.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant interest on delayed payment retirement benefits superannuation compounding of interest

Ram Chander Sharma v. Mohd. Rafiq & Ors.

30 Nov 2016 · J.R. Midha · 2016:DHC:7751

Delhi High Court enhanced the motor accident compensation award from Rs. 3,02,950/- to Rs. 5,50,000/- considering the appellant's permanent disability and prolonged treatment.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident compensation permanent disability enhancement of compensation pain and suffering

ICICI Bank Ltd v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.

30 Nov 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:7736

The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction under Section 20 CPC is determined by the cause of action and set aside the trial court’s order returning plaints for lack of jurisdiction in ICICI Bank’s loan recovery suits.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Order VII Rule 10 CPC cause of action loan recovery suit

ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.

30 Nov 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:7737

The Delhi High Court held that civil suits for loan recovery can be filed where part of the cause of action arises, setting aside the trial court's order returning plaints for lack of territorial jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Order VII Rule 10 CPC Section 20 CPC loan recovery suits

ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.

30 Nov 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:7738

The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction in loan recovery suits under Section 20 CPC includes courts where the bank branch is located, setting aside the trial court's order returning plaints for lack of jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Order VII Rule 10 CPC Section 20 CPC cause of action

ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.

30 Nov 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:7739

The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction in civil loan recovery suits is governed by Section 20 CPC and set aside the trial court's order returning plaints for lack of jurisdiction based on a misapplication of criminal jurisdiction principles.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Order VII Rule 10 CPC Section 20 CPC loan recovery suit

ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.

30 Nov 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:7740

The Delhi High Court held that Delhi courts have territorial jurisdiction over loan recovery suits where part of the cause of action arises, setting aside trial court orders returning plaints for lack of jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Order VII Rule 10 CPC Section 20 CPC loan recovery suit

ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.

30 Nov 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:7734

The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction in loan recovery suits is governed by Section 20 CPC and set aside the trial court's order returning plaints based on misapplication of criminal procedure law.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Order VII Rule 10 CPC Section 20 CPC loan recovery suit

ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.

30 Nov 2016 · Sunil Gaur · 2016:DHC:7735

The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction in civil suits for loan recovery is governed by Section 20 CPC and that disbursement through a dealer outside jurisdiction does not oust the court's jurisdiction where the loan agreement was executed and repayments made.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Order VII Rule 10 CPC cause of action loan recovery suit

Bharat Singh v. State

30 Nov 2016 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:7719

The Delhi High Court clarified that parole does not bar furlough in the same year and directed regular suo moto identification of convicts eligible for furlough.

criminal petition_dismissed parole furlough Delhi Prisons Act, 2000 temporary release

State v. Gurpreet Singh Walia

30 Nov 2016 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:7720

The High Court upheld the trial court's refusal to send a memory chip for repeated forensic examination, emphasizing the need to avoid undue trial delay once expert reports are on record.

criminal petition_dismissed Forensic Science Laboratory Central Forensic Science Laboratory Memory chip Spy camera

Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Tarun Klumar Jain

29 Nov 2016 · S. Muralidhar · 2016:DHC:9357

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition filed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi for non-prosecution and allowed restoration only upon filing an appropriate affidavit.

civil petition_dismissed non-prosecution dismissal of petition restoration application affidavit

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd v. Ruchi Suri & Ors.

29 Nov 2016 · J.R. Midha · 2016:DHC:7702

The Delhi High Court held that legal representatives of a deceased claimant can continue a claim for compensation after the claimant's death during pendency, dismissing the insurer's appeal and upholding the award to the deceased's sisters.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant compensation Motor Vehicles Act legal representatives right to sue