Delhi High Court

80,866 judgments

Year:

BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd v. Satya Prakash Vashisht & Ors

31 Aug 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:11265-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pension liability for voluntary retirees under special schemes lies with DISCOMS, not the Pension Trust, clarified qualifying service rules under CCS (Pension) Rules, and upheld constitution of arbitral tribunals to determine contributions.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Electricity Reforms Act, 2000 Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme Pension Trust liability CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972

VIRAJIMPEX PVT LTD v. TARACHAND THR LRS

31 Aug 2015 · V. K. Shali · 2015:DHC:10891

The Delhi High Court dismissed three criminal revision petitions as not pressed upon the petitioner's counsel's statement, disposing of all pending applications.

criminal appeal_dismissed Procedural criminal revision petition dismissal as not pressed stay application High Court of Delhi

Gokul Projects v. Gail Gas Ltd.

31 Aug 2015 · Najmi Waziri · 2015:DHC:10805

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator after the respondent failed to do so within the stipulated time under the arbitration agreement, thereby facilitating the arbitration process.

civil other arbitration appointment of arbitrator arbitration agreement court-appointed arbitrator

Balvir Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

31 Aug 2015 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015:DHC:7156-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that in sexual harassment disciplinary inquiries, the delinquent must be allowed to cross-examine witnesses and lead defense evidence with appropriate safeguards, setting aside the compulsory retirement order for failure to provide such opportunity.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant sexual harassment inquiry natural justice cross-examination defense evidence

Durga Softelcom Pvt Ltd v. Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd. & Ors.

31 Aug 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:7120

The court held that the main lease deed clauses specifying a 32-month lock-in period prevail over a 15-year period claimed in a schedule attached as a site plan, dismissing the plaintiff's claim for extended lease continuation but granting injunction against removal of plaintiff's movable goods.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant lease deed lock-in period schedule to lease deed injunction

Harpal Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

31 Aug 2015 · Sanjiv Khanna; R.K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:7103-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the pre-detention challenge to a COFEPOSA detention order, holding that delay and alleged abscondence do not automatically vitiate preventive detention absent exceptional grounds.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant COFEPOSA preventive detention pre-detention challenge live link

Subhash Chander Mehta v. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd. & Anr

31 Aug 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2015:DHC:7104

The Delhi High Court held that a disciplinary authority must provide a note of disagreement and hearing opportunity before imposing penalty contrary to enquiry findings, setting aside penalties imposed without such compliance.

administrative petition_allowed Significant disciplinary authority enquiry officer note of disagreement natural justice

Sharat Babu Digumarti v. State, Govt. of NCT of Delhi

31 Aug 2015 · S.P. Garg · 2015:DHC:7105

The Delhi High Court upheld framing of charge under Section 292 IPC against a senior manager of an online marketplace for failing to prevent obscene listings, emphasizing the limited scope of revisional interference at the charge stage.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 292 IPC obscenity intermediary liability charge framing

Malkeet Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

31 Aug 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7111-DB

The Delhi High Court held that candidates who accepted appointment to a lower post with revised pay scales after undertaking cannot claim entitlement to the originally advertised higher post.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Airports Authority of India Air Traffic Control cadre Recruitment Rules Pay scale revision

Tatpal Singh Jaggi and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

31 Aug 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:7101-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the arbitrary exclusion of eminent sportspersons from the Puraskar Selection Committee was unsustainable, but upheld the award to Respondent No. 5 as per Scheme criteria applicable to individuals, emphasizing fairness and reasoned executive discretion.

administrative other Significant Rashtriya Khel Protsahan Puraskar Selection Committee composition Sports promotion Financial contribution criteria

Ajay Kapoor v. The State

31 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:7142

Pre-arrest bail was denied to the accused in a ₹12 crore cheating case due to the necessity of custodial interrogation for effective investigation despite the accused not being named in the FIR.

criminal appeal_dismissed pre-arrest bail custodial interrogation economic offence cheating

Garima Yadav v. Dean, Social Sciences Faculty, Delhi University & Ors.

31 Aug 2015 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2015:DHC:7099

The Delhi High Court directed Delhi University to admit the petitioner under the OBC category by transferring vacant OBC seats from the entrance test mode to the direct admission mode, upholding the constitutional mandate of 27% reservation for OBCs.

administrative petition_allowed Significant OBC reservation unfilled reserved seats admission procedure Delhi University

Rotary Club Delhi v. Union of India

31 Aug 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7102-DB

The Delhi High Court held that NGOs cannot be held liable to pay salaries for the period after project funding ceased when employees continued working only due to an interim court order that was ultimately set aside.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant interim order pecuniary liability work charge employees project employment

Sun Distribution Services Private Limited v. Union of India & Anr.

31 Aug 2015 · MS. G. Rohini; Jayant Nath · 2015:DHC:7097-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the TDSAT's interim order directing provisional interconnect agreements without prior SLR verification, emphasizing judicial restraint in interfering with statutory tribunal orders absent illegality.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Telecommunication (Broadcasting & Cable Services) Interconnection Regulations, 2004 Subscriber Line Report (SLR) Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) interim order

Rotary Club Delhi v. Union of India

31 Aug 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:7096-DB

The Delhi High Court held that NGOs cannot be held liable to pay salaries for the period after project funding ceased merely because employees continued to work pursuant to an interim court order, applying the principle that no party shall suffer loss or gain advantage due to the act of the Court.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant interim order pecuniary liability project employment actus curiae neminem gravabit

Rameshwar Dayal v. Saroj Bala Rathore

31 Aug 2015 · V.K. Shali · 2015:DHC:7152

The Delhi High Court upheld an eviction order on bona fide requirement grounds, emphasizing the presumption in favor of the landlord and the tenant's failure to raise triable issues at the leave to defend stage.

property appeal_dismissed Significant bona fide requirement eviction Delhi Rent Control Act leave to defend

Varun Jain v. Nikhil Jain and Others

31 Aug 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:7151

The Delhi High Court decreed a civil suit based on a voluntary mutual family settlement executed by the parties during the pendency of the suit.

civil appeal_allowed Mutual Family Settlement Civil Suit Decree on Settlement Voluntary Settlement

Saurabh Saxena & Ors. v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

31 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:7134

The Delhi High Court quashed two FIRs based on an amicable settlement between neighbours, applying the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR compromise amicable settlement

Ashok Kumar Tripathi v. Narcotics Control Bureau

31 Aug 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:7132
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The court held that detention beyond 180 days under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. requires specific reasons to be recorded, and absence thereof entitles the accused to seek default bail.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant default bail Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. NDPS Act judicial remand

Sanjay Gupta v. State & Ors.

31 Aug 2015 · Siddharth Mridul · 2015:DHC:7123-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR against the employer in an accidental death case upon payment of just and fair compensation to the deceased's legal heirs as per statutory mandates.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 304-A IPC Section 287 IPC Employees Compensation Act 1923