Delhi High Court

80,866 judgments

Year:

Shweta Sharma v. M/S. Volkswagen Finance Pvt. Ltd.

23 Feb 2015 · V.K. Shali · 2016:DHC:1517

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the repossession order under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act for non-maintainability, directing the appellant to first seek modification before the original court.

civil appeal_dismissed Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 9 Section 37 repossession

NTT DOCOMO INC. v. TATA SONS LIMITED

23 Feb 2015 · S. Muralidhar · 2017:DHC:2254

Delhi High Court held that RBI has no locus standi to intervene in enforcement of an arbitral award between private parties and upheld enforcement of the award and consent terms despite RBI's objections under FEMA.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitral Award Enforcement Locus Standi of RBI Foreign Exchange Management Act Shareholder Agreement

Ashok Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

20 Feb 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that CRPF personnel completing 24 years of service are entitled to the second financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme even if not sent for or completing pre-promotional courses due to administrative reasons.

service_law appeal_allowed Significant Assured Career Progression Scheme second financial upgradation pre-promotional course Central Reserve Police Force

Hari Kishore Sharma v. Chief Secretary Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

16 Feb 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:62-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against refusal of interim stay in a writ petition challenging deputation-based appointment over contractual extension, holding that interim relief in employment matters requires exceptional circumstances.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant interim relief contractual employment permanent absorption deputation

Sunagro Seeds Pvt Ltd v. National Seeds Corporation Ltd

16 Feb 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:755-DB

The Delhi High Court held that liquidated damages at 3% of the cost of un-lifted seeds, as per the contract schedule, is the correct measure of damages payable for breach of contract, reducing the arbitrator’s award accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed Significant liquidated damages breach of contract measure of damages arbitration award

Ajay Kumar Sinha v. Indraprastha Power Generation Company Limited & Pragati Power Corporation Limited

12 Feb 2015 · Jyoti Singh · 2024:DHC:7089
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The court held that non-communication of ACR entries violates Article 14 and directed retrospective promotion and seniority restoration upon upgradation of ACRs with review DPC consideration.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Annual Confidential Report ACR communication Promotion Seniority restoration

Nipun Malhotra v. Government of Delhi NCT

11 Feb 2015 · Chief Justice; V. Kameswar Rao · 2016:DHC:7614-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Government to clarify and conduct a disability audit of government buildings to ensure accessibility for differently abled persons, underscoring the State's duty to facilitate disabled persons' rights.

constitutional other Significant disability audit differently abled persons accessibility government buildings

M/S S & S TECHNOCRAFT (P) LTD v. RATHI STEEL LIMITED

10 Feb 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:6638-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against refusal of leave to defend a suit for steel supply payment, holding that delayed and vague pleas of defective goods and forged documents were sham and the suit was within limitation.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) CPC leave to defend Sale of Goods Act Section 42 acceptance of goods

City Palace Electronics (P) Ltd v. M/S Sony India (P) Ltd

06 Feb 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:1560-DB

The Delhi High Court held that goods sold on principal-to-principal basis vest ownership in the buyer, dismissed Sony's claim to repossess goods, set aside warranty-related interim directions beyond suit scope, and imposed costs on Sony for frivolous pleadings.

civil appeal_allowed Significant principal to principal sale legal ownership of goods interim injunction Order 37 CPC

Delhi Development Authority v. Harish Chander

04 Feb 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:9388-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the DDA's appeal, setting aside the order directing allotment of a flat to Harish Chander at 1989 rates due to his inordinate delay and failure to prove dispatch of the demand letter.

property appeal_allowed Significant Delhi Development Authority Special Housing Registration Scheme allotment of flats demand-cum-allotment letter

Vishal @ Nanu & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

04 Feb 2015 · Siddharth Mridul, J · 2016:DHC:917-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 323, 308, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, imposing conditions of good behaviour and compensation.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC Section 323 IPC Section 308 IPC

Pooja Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

04 Feb 2015 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:918-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed FIR and related proceedings arising from a private dispute following an amicable settlement between the parties under its inherent powers.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR amicable settlement Section 482 CrPC Article 226 Constitution

Pooja Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

04 Feb 2015 · Siddharth Mridul · 2016:DHC:919-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed FIR and related proceedings arising from a private dispute following an amicable settlement between the parties under its inherent powers.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC Article 226 Constitution amicable settlement

Sushil Kumar v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

02 Feb 2015 · S. Muralidhar; I. S. Mehta · 2018:DHC:9083-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court directed continued lawful investigation into the disappearance of Shri Pyare Lal, emphasizing the necessity of truthful cooperation from family members and periodic reporting by police.

criminal other missing person investigation polygraph test mobile phone forensic examination

Iqbal Singh and Anr v. Ashok Lamba and Anr

30 Jan 2015 · Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:3350

The Delhi High Court upheld the restoration of a suit dismissed for non-appearance, holding that deaths in the plaintiff's family constituted sufficient cause under Order IX Rule 9 CPC, and imposed costs to compensate the defendants.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant restoration of suit Order IX Rule 9 CPC sufficient cause non-appearance

Symantec Software Solutions v. R Modi & Ors.

27 Jan 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:5398-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court’s discretionary order permitting additional witnesses to be summoned, emphasizing that such orders should not be disturbed unless legally erroneous or causing grave injustice.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant software copyright software piracy additional witnesses Order XVI Rule 1 CPC

Rahul v. State NCT of Delhi

21 Jan 2015 · S.P. Garg · 2016:DHC:504

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Section 376 IPC of a minor prosecutrix but modified the sentence considering the subsequent marriage between the appellant and prosecutrix after she attained majority.

criminal sentence_modified Significant Section 376 IPC rape minor consent

M/S VISIONAIRE INDIA v. M/S IBM INDIA PVT LTD

15 Jan 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:432-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the condonation of delay in filing the written statement caused by the agent's negligence and improper service at a non-principal office.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay written statement service of summons agent's negligence

Rajasthan Trade Union Kendra & Anr. v. Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction & Ors.

14 Jan 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:1747-DB

The Delhi High Court held that its earlier procedural order did not decide the substantive issue of Bench competence under Section 12(3) SICA and directed the appellate authority to decide the petitioners' objection afresh.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 Section 12(3) SICA Board for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction Bench constitution

Ved Praksh Dubey v. M/S Maheshwari Gas Service

13 Jan 2015 · CHIEF JUSTICE; V. KAMESWAR RAO · 2016:DHC:7638-DB

The Delhi High Court held that under Section 36(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, representation by Advocates before the Labour Court is barred and prior judicial orders disallowing such representation cannot be circumvented by implied consent.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 36(3) representation by Advocate implied consent