Delhi High Court

69,037 judgments

Year:

Anju Devi Jatav v. Addl. Deputy Commissioner of Police

29 Aug 2016 · G. S. Sistani; I. S. Mehta · 2016:DHC:6102-DB

The Delhi High Court held that non-disclosure of a trivial criminal case settled under probation does not automatically disqualify a candidate, directing reconsideration of cancellation in light of Supreme Court precedents and departmental rules.

administrative other Significant non-disclosure criminal antecedents Probation of Offenders Act moral turpitude

Creons Infrastructure Pvt Ltd v. Lifestyle International Pvt Ltd

29 Aug 2016 · Hima Kohli · 2016:DHC:6095

The Delhi High Court disposed of a civil suit on the basis of an out-of-court settlement and granted the plaintiff a 50% refund of court fees under Section 16-A of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

civil appeal_allowed out-of-court settlement disposal of suit Section 16-A Court Fees Act refund of court fees

Rajinder Nath Dhawan & Anr v. Pravesh Dhawan & Ors

29 Aug 2016 · Hima Kohli · 2016:DHC:6094

The Delhi High Court disposed of a petition for transfer of a suit as infructuous since the related suit had already been transferred to the same court.

civil other transfer petition civil suit pecuniary jurisdiction infructuous petition

Mahendra Verma v. Ajay Suresh Kilachand & Ors.

29 Aug 2016 · Hima Kohli · 2016:DHC:6092

The Delhi High Court directed the Registry to send court records to the Bombay Civil Court and provide proof of dispatch to the Decree Holder to facilitate execution proceedings.

civil other Procedural Decree Holder Judgment Debtor Registry Transfer of records

M/S LABORATOIRE GARNIER & CIE v. M/S HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD.

29 Aug 2016 · Hima Kohli · 2016:DHC:6093

The Delhi High Court dismissed the civil suit as withdrawn following an out of court settlement between the parties.

civil appeal_dismissed out of court settlement dismissal as withdrawn civil suit pending applications

SI3D Systems Pvt. Ltd. v. Technology Development Board

29 Aug 2016 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2016:DHC:6097

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award in favor of Technology Development Board, ruling that disputes over loan disbursal and repayment were arbitrable and the finding of diversion of funds was supported by evidence.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Loan Agreement Technology Development Board

National Small Industries Corp. Ltd. v. Myson Electronics P. Ltd. & Ors.

29 Aug 2016 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2016:DHC:6096

The Delhi High Court dismissed the application to set aside an ex-parte decree in a summary suit against a guarantor, holding that summons were validly served and no special circumstances or substantial defence were shown under Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order XXXVII CPC summary suit ex-parte decree service of summons

Goyal MG Gases Pvt. Ltd. v. SBQ Steels Ltd.

29 Aug 2016 · Manmohan Singh, J. · 2016:DHC:6109

The Delhi High Court held that Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies Act does not bar arbitration proceedings at the pre-award stage, allowing continuation of arbitration despite BIFR registration of the respondent.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Section 22(1) of SICA Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Arbitral proceedings Pre-award stage

Goyal MG Gases Pvt. Ltd. v. SBQ Steels Ltd.

29 Aug 2016 · Manmohan Singh, J. · 2016:DHC:6107

The Delhi High Court held that Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies Act does not bar pre-award arbitration proceedings and set aside the suspension of arbitration, directing the Arbitral Tribunal to decide interim relief on merit.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Section 22(1) of SICA Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Pre-award arbitration proceedings Suspension of arbitration

Gurmeet Singh and Ors v. N.D.M.C. and Anr

29 Aug 2016 · Indermeet Kaur, J. · 2016:DHC:6100

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of petitioners occupying shops on public land under a license, ruling that tehbazari rights are permissive and non-transferable, and government eviction policies are valid.

property petition_dismissed Significant tehbazari rights license public premises eviction

Rajinder Kumar v. UOI and Ors

29 Aug 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:6098-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, regardless of possession.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings non-payment of compensation

Ranvir Singh Verma v. Union of India

29 Aug 2016 · G. S. Sistani; I. S. Mehta · 2016:DHC:6099-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed an ex-serviceman's writ petition directing relaxation of educational qualifications for recruitment as Assistant Sub-Inspector (Radio Technician) based on equivalence of naval training and government policies on ex-servicemen reservation.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant ex-servicemen relaxation recruitment rules equivalence certificate National Classification of Occupations

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited v. Anil Kumar

29 Aug 2016 · G. S. Sistani; I. S. Mehta · 2016:DHC:6101-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's quashing of MTNL employees' transfer orders as mala fide retaliation for lodging police complaints, emphasizing that transfers made as punishment are illegal and must be supported by genuine administrative reasons.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant transfer orders mala fide government servant administrative tribunal

Harshit Rajan v. Lt. Governor of Delhi

29 Aug 2016 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar · 2016:DHC:6104-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 compensation remains unpaid for over five years, regardless of possession claims.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) of 2013 Act Land Acquisition Act, 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings compensation unpaid

Uzanto Consulting India Private Limited v. LinkedIn Technology Information Private Limited

29 Aug 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:6057

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between Uzanto Consulting India Private Limited and LinkedIn Technology Information Private Limited under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, after finding no objections and rectification of procedural defaults.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394 transferor company

Viresh Saxena v. Union of India & Anr

29 Aug 2016 · G.S. Sistani; I.S. Mehta · 2016:DHC:6105-DB

The Delhi High Court held that an employee under suspension is entitled to subsistence allowance at prescribed rates and annual increments during suspension unless specifically denied, directing the respondents to grant these benefits to the petitioner.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant suspension subsistence allowance annual increments departmental inquiry

Dalim Commercial Private Limited v. H S Projects Private Limited

29 Aug 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:6039

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between Dalim Commercial Private Limited and H S Projects Private Limited under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, allowing dissolution of the transferor company without winding up.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394 Accounting Standard-14

East Delhi Leasing Private Limited v. Leading Estates Limited

29 Aug 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:6066

The Delhi High Court allowed a joint application under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956 to dispense with convening meetings of shareholders and creditors for approving a Scheme of Amalgamation where all shareholders consented and no creditors existed.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Section 391 Companies Act 1956 dispensing with meetings shareholders consent

Consumer Financial Services Limited v. L&T Housing Finance Limited

29 Aug 2016 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2016:DHC:6080

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between Consumer Financial Services Limited and L&T Housing Finance Limited under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, dissolving the transferor company without winding up.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394 transferor company

Rattanindia Nasik Power Ltd v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd

29 Aug 2016 · Manmohan Singh · 2016:DHC:6069
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that unconditional Bank Guarantees are independent contracts unaffected by termination disputes and must be kept alive during arbitration to protect advance payments, modifying the Arbitral Tribunal's order releasing all guarantees.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Bank Guarantee Advance Bank Guarantee Performance Bank Guarantee Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996