Delhi High Court

77,325 judgments

Year:

HRD PRIVATE ITI v. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING AND ORS

28 Sep 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:8101

The Delhi High Court allowed multiple writ petitions by referring to and applying the directions issued in a prior lead judgment concerning private ITIs and directed the respondents to act accordingly.

administrative appeal_allowed Procedural writ petitions private ITI judicial economy lead judgment

HRD PRIVATE ITI v. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING AND ORS

28 Sep 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:8111

The Delhi High Court allowed a batch of writ petitions filed by private ITIs by applying the directions issued in a prior lead petition judgment concerning the regulation of private ITIs.

administrative appeal_allowed writ petition private ITI Directorate General of Employment and Training judicial economy

SHS v. PUS

28 Sep 2015 · Vipin Sanghi · 2015:DHC:8132

The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the dismissal of the divorce petition on territorial jurisdiction grounds, and remanded the matter for merits adjudication after accepting the appellant's unimpeached evidence of residence.

family appeal_allowed Significant residence proof territorial jurisdiction divorce petition Order 41 Rule 27 CPC

Divya Suri v. Union of India & Ors.

28 Sep 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:8134-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a subsequent purchaser is entitled to the benefit of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act, declaring acquisition proceedings lapsed where compensation was unpaid for over five years.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 deemed lapse of acquisition subsequent purchaser rights

Jyotsna Suri v. Union of India & Ors.

28 Sep 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:8135-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings pending for over five years without compensation under the 1894 Act are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, and this benefit extends to subsequent purchasers.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 deemed lapse of acquisition subsequent purchaser rights

Keshav Suri v. Union of India & Ors.

28 Sep 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:8136-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 is unpaid for five years, and this benefit extends to subsequent purchasers.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 deemed lapse of acquisition subsequent purchaser rights

Jyotsna Suri v. Union of India & Ors.

28 Sep 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:8130-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act are deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, and this benefit extends to subsequent purchasers.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) of 2013 Act Land Acquisition Act 1894 deemed lapse of acquisition subsequent purchaser

Springer Editorial Services Private Limited v. Springer (India) Private Limited

28 Sep 2015 · Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2015:DHC:8140

The Delhi High Court allowed a joint application to dispense with certain meetings and directed the convening of unsecured creditors' meeting for approval of a Scheme of Amalgamation under the Companies Act, 1956.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act, 1956 Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 Shareholders consent

Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Limited v. Chemical Systems Technologies (India) Pvt Ltd

28 Sep 2015 · Gita Mittal; I. S. Mehta · 2015:DHC:8110-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and recorded a bonafide settlement under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC, staying execution of the decree subject to payment terms, with provisions for execution upon cheque dishonour.

civil appeal_dismissed settlement agreement Order 23 Rule 3 CPC execution of decree post-dated cheques

Mukesh Lata v. Union Public Service Commission & Anr.

28 Sep 2015 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015:DHC:8131-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging UPSC's shortlisting criteria for a government post, holding that raising the benchmark based on desirable qualifications is permissible if in accordance with the advertisement and Recruitment Rules.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant UPSC shortlisting criteria Director of Employment Exchanges Recruitment Rules

Ram Charan v. Ram Gopal

28 Sep 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2015:DHC:8137-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld that a consent decree transferring tenancy rights in a property does not confer ownership, and an application to modify the decree to transfer ownership was barred by res judicata.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant consent decree tenancy rights ownership rights rectification of decree

Aas Mohd v. Renu Seth

28 Sep 2015 · Vipin Sanghi · 2015:DHC:8142

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal upholding possession decree for the landlord, rejecting the tenant's unregistered agreement to sell as a frivolous defence and emphasizing the necessity of specific pleadings and registered documents to claim possession.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant possession agreement to sell tenant unregistered document

State of Tamil Nadu v. Union of India and Anr

28 Sep 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2015:DHC:8079

The Delhi High Court upheld the Central Government’s order setting aside the suspension of an IPS officer who had assumed charge on central deputation, holding that the State Government lacked jurisdiction to suspend her thereafter.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant suspension All India Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969 central deputation jurisdiction

Deepak Dutta @ Kanwar Lal Dutta v. Yog Raj & Ors.

28 Sep 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:8114

The Delhi High Court disposed of the execution petition after the objector paid the decretal amount in installments secured by post-dated cheques, satisfying the decree and ending the litigation.

civil other execution petition decree satisfaction installment payment post-dated cheques

Ravinder Kumar & Anr v. State of Delhi & Anr

28 Sep 2015 · P. S. Teji · 2015:DHC:8122

The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable Section 304A IPC FIR under its inherent powers in light of an amicable settlement and absence of intent, applying Supreme Court guidelines on quashing criminal proceedings.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 304A IPC inherent powers of High Court

Sanjiv Arya v. State & Anr

28 Sep 2015 · P. S. Teji · 2015:DHC:8121

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from matrimonial disputes under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process of law.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498-A IPC

Saroj Gupta v. M/s Gautam Enterprises and Anr.

28 Sep 2015 · R. K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:8120

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation for illegal retrenchment where the petitioner refused reinstatement, applying Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act and awarding interest for delayed payment.

labor petition_allowed Significant illegal retrenchment reinstatement compensation Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

Madina v. State NCT of Delhi

28 Sep 2015 · Indermeet Kaur · 2015:DHC:11251

The Delhi High Court set aside the order taking cognizance under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act against a mother and grandmother, holding that normal familial reprimands do not amount to wilful neglect or harassment.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 23 Juvenile Justice Act Section 164 CrPC wilful neglect mother-daughter relationship

Yacub Kispotta & Ors. v. Director General BSF & Ors.

28 Sep 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2015:DHC:8097-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that dismissal of BSF personnel without a proper inquiry was unlawful, emphasizing that executive satisfaction dispensing with inquiry must be based on relevant material and is subject to judicial review.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Border Security Force Act, 1968 Rule 22 BSF Rules 1969 Article 311(2) Constitution disciplinary inquiry

Naresh Goel and Ors v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr

28 Sep 2015 · Suresh Kait · 2015:DHC:8081

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 420, 468, and 471 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, applying the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC with conditions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR non-compoundable offences settlement between parties