Delhi High Court

73,320 judgments

Year:

Jagdish Chander v. Delhi Transport Corporation

30 Jun 2015 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:844-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition directing the DTC to pay pensionary benefits from superannuation subject to the petitioner returning CPF benefits with interest, quashing the CAT order without deciding the broader legal question.

administrative appeal_allowed pension optee Contributory Provident Fund pensionary benefits reinstatement

Rewant Ahlawat v. Central Board of Secondary Education

25 Jun 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:3098

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking correction of date of birth in a CBSE certificate beyond the prescribed limitation period, holding that statutory bye-laws and procedural requirements must be respected and courts cannot override them under Article 226.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant date of birth correction CBSE bye-laws limitation period Article 226

Viterra B.V. v. Sharp Corp Limited

25 Jun 2015 · C. Hari Shankar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed contempt petitions against Sharp Corp Ltd., holding that the sale of a charged immovable property to satisfy prior financial institution rights did not constitute wilful disobedience of its injunction order.

civil petition_dismissed Significant civil contempt wilful disobedience prior charge injunction

Kenisha Agrawal v. Union of India

24 Jun 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:2041
Cites 1 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court upheld the exclusion of OCI holders from representing India in the final International Mathematical Olympiads, affirming that only Indian citizens have this right under existing law and policy.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Overseas Citizen of India International Mathematical Olympiad Citizenship Act 1955 Indian citizenship

Senjil Gupta v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation

05 Jun 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2019:DHC:514
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that appeals under Section 347D of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, lie only against orders confirming, modifying, or annulling orders or notices under Sections 343 or 347B, excluding interlocutory orders under the CPC.

civil other Significant Section 347D Delhi Municipal Corporation Act Appellate jurisdiction Interlocutory orders Order XXII Rule 10 CPC

Sarabjeet Singh Sethi v. Deputy Director of Education, North West, Government of NCT Delhi & Ors.

04 Jun 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:720

The Delhi High Court held that divorce and remarriage do not extinguish a biological father's right to have his name recorded as the father in school records, directing correction of such records accordingly.

family petition_allowed Significant biological father parental rights school records divorce

Through: Mr. R.K. Saini, Mr. Minal Sehgal, Advocates v. GURU HARKRISHAN PUBLIC SCHOOL (NEW DELHI SOCIETY) &

29 May 2015 · HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA; To be referred to the R... · 2017:DHC:1673

The Delhi High Court held that transfer of an employee between branches of a private unaided school under the same management is valid if a common seniority list is maintained and the employment terms permit such transfer, dismissing the petitioner’s challenge to his transfer.

labor petition_dismissed Significant transfer of employee private unaided school common seniority list terms and conditions of employment

Harjit Kaur v. Surinder Singh

23 May 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Yogesh Khanna · 2016:DHC:7566-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the wife's appeal, setting aside the divorce decree granted on grounds of cruelty, holding that the husband's extramarital affair during marriage constituted cruelty and the wife was denied a fair opportunity to prove it.

family appeal_allowed Significant cruelty extramarital affair Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 divorce

Qarshi Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Abdul Mueed & Ors.

17 May 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:1694-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal seeking interim injunction in a passing off suit over the trademark 'JAM-E-SHIRIN', holding that a strong prima facie case is required against a registered proprietor and that pleadings must be complete before grant of injunction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant passing off trademark interim injunction descriptiveness

Maruti Traders v. Itron India Pvt Ltd

15 May 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5291

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award dismissing the petitioner’s claims for exclusive dealership and commission, holding that no valid contract existed prior to the Reseller Agreement and that the respondent’s direct sales and appointment of other resellers did not breach the non-exclusive reseller agreement.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Reseller Agreement Non-exclusive dealership

Duttmenon Dunmorsett v. Union of India

14 May 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A. K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:4217-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 6

The Delhi High Court held that reimbursements for senior counsel fees cannot be included in the taxable value of services under the Finance Act, 1994 prior to the 2015 amendment, quashing the service tax demand on such reimbursements.

tax petition_allowed Significant service tax valuation of taxable services reimbursements Finance Act 1994

Gagan Sharma v. The Secretary, Services Department Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

11 May 2015 · Jyoti Singh · 2023:DHC:4208
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed a belated claim for compassionate appointment by the son of a deceased Work Charge employee, reaffirming that such appointments must be granted promptly to families facing immediate financial crisis and are not a vested right.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant compassionate appointment delay laches financial crisis

Mandir Shri Krishan Bhagwan & Anr v. Union of India & Ors

10 May 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:3737-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 from the award date.

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

Sanjay Khanna v. M/S Vasu Tech Ltd. & Ors.

06 May 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:3576

The Delhi High Court dismissed defendant's leave to defend application in a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC, holding that a corporate guarantee with personal endorsement constitutes a written contract and that frivolous defenses of duress cannot defeat recovery.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Corporate Guarantee Order XXXVII CPC Leave to defend Written contract

Shiv Lal v. Govt of NCT of Delhi

02 May 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:3405-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, granting the petitioners a declaration of lapse.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Section 24(2) acquisition proceedings lapse

Shiv Lal v. Govt of NCT of Delhi

02 May 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:3408-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is not paid within five years of the award, regardless of possession claims.

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

GAIL (INDIA) LIMITED v. M/S RATHI STEEL AND POWER LTD

28 Apr 2015 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2022:DHC:632

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that limitation is a substantive issue for arbitration unless claims are ex-facie barred.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 Limitation Pay For If Not Taken

ITW GSE APS & Anr. v. DABICO Airport Solutions Pvt Ltd & Ors.

23 Apr 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:7900

The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiffs' application for appointment of a local Commissioner under Order XXVI Rule 10A CPC to inspect defendants' products for patent infringement, holding that sufficient evidence already existed and the provision cannot be used to gather better evidence.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order XXVI Rule 10A CPC scientific investigation local Commissioner patent infringement

Hira Lal Bhat v. Chairman and Managing Director BSNL and Ors.

11 Apr 2015 · C. Hari Shankar; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:9915-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 2

Delhi High Court held that emergency medical treatment expenses incurred by a government employee in a non-empanelled hospital must be fully reimbursed, overruling the Tribunal's denial and emphasizing the binding nature of Emergency Certificates.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant medical reimbursement emergency treatment liver transplant surgery Central Government Health Scheme

Tanveer El Umar Khan v. State & Anr

21 Mar 2015 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:2382-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 379 IPC and Section 135 Indian Electricity Act following amicable settlement and payment by the petitioner, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC illegal abstraction of electricity Section 379 IPC