Delhi High Court
75,670 judgments
M/S PRESTRESS WIRE INDUSTRIES v. M/S UPPAL BUILDERS PVT LTD
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award allowing rebate only on tendered work, compensation for price escalation beyond contract period, and 18% interest, dismissing the petition challenging the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Akshem Chand through LR atlo Devi v. Suresh Bala & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a practicing advocate's application under Section 340 CrPC alleging fraud in a final civil judgment as an abuse of process, affirming that fraud allegations must be raised in original proceedings and imposing heavy costs to deter vexatious litigation.
Sarika v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board
The Delhi High Court upheld the DSSSB's discretion to fix minimum qualifying marks for reserved category candidates and dismissed the petition challenging non-selection despite appearing in the merit list.
Jaikishan Aggarwal v. Union of India & Ors
The Delhi High Court upheld HPCL's cancellation of a retail outlet allotment due to failure to provide land and held that the Chief Commissioner cannot direct preferential land allotment to persons with disabilities beyond statutory authority.
Anurag Sharma v. Manushi Sharma
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal dissolving a turbulent marriage on the ground of mental cruelty, recognizing mutual bickering and irretrievable breakdown as relevant factors under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Om Prakash v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that for ACP benefits, service period must be reckoned from initial appointment ignoring re-mustering to merged posts, dismissing review petitions challenging this interpretation.
Om Prakash v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed review petitions and held that re-mustering does not reset service tenure for ACP benefits, applying DOPT clarifications on merged pay scales.
Om Prakash v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that for ACP benefits, service period must be reckoned from initial appointment ignoring re-mustering to merged posts, applying DOPT clarifications to uphold petitioners' entitlement.
Om Prakash v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that for ACP benefits, service must be reckoned from initial appointment ignoring re-mustering promotions before merger of posts, dismissing review petitions challenging this interpretation.
Om Prakash v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed review petitions holding that for ACP benefits, service must be reckoned from initial appointment ignoring re-mustering to merged posts, as per DOPT clarifications.
Om Prakash v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that for ACP benefits, service must be reckoned from initial appointment ignoring re-mustering to merged posts, dismissing review petitions challenging this interpretation.
M/S JAI JUTE INDUSTRIES LTD. v. M/S STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR
The Delhi High Court upheld AAIFR's condonation of delay in filing an appeal by the State of West Bengal, excluding the period spent pursuing a review before BIFR under principles analogous to Section 14 of the Limitation Act.
State Trading Corporation of India v. Helm Dungemittel GmbH & Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging an arbitral award, holding that a communication seeking approval was an invitation to treat, not a binding offer, and upheld the original contract terms and limited judicial interference in arbitration.
Annabelle Analista Malibago v. DRI
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and 10-year sentence under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act, holding that minor procedural discrepancies do not undermine the consistent and corroborated prosecution evidence of heroin possession.
ITC Limited v. The Deputy Registrar of Trademarks and Ors.
The Delhi High Court restored ITC's trademark opposition and cancelled the registration of "LUCKY NINE" after holding that the opposition was wrongly treated as abandoned despite ITC's timely expression to rely on its grounds.
G D Goenka Pvt Ltd v. Dinodia Educational Society
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that the court first seized of a Section 9 application under Section 42 has exclusive jurisdiction over subsequent arbitration-related proceedings.
Union of India v. Vinay Kumar
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order allowing deputation period to count towards residency for promotion under the Flexible Complementary Scheme, clarifying the applicability of the 2013 Rules excluding deputationists from FCS eligibility.
North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. R&T Enterprises
Delhi High Court upheld arbitral award awarding compensation and interest to contractor for delayed site handover and payments by Municipal Corporation, dismissing challenge on limitation and evidentiary grounds.
Mohd Nafish Khan & Ors v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors
The Delhi High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging land conversion proceedings under the DLR Act, holding they were not barred by limitation and procedural requirements were met.
Center for Research Planning and Action v. National Medicinal Plants Board Ministry of Ayush Government of India
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and reinstated the arbitral award, holding that judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is limited and the award by an expert arbitrator was not patently illegal or against public policy.