Delhi High Court
80,411 judgments
M/S M.R. TOWERS PVT. LTD. v. Union of India and Ors
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession and compensation are not completed within five years of the award.
Bhim Singh v. Govt of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that a government servant formally appointed to hold charge of a higher post outside his cadre is entitled to the pay of that post under FR 49(iii), quashing the Tribunal’s dismissal of the petitioner’s claim for pay difference as Store Keeper.
Rakesh and Anr v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession is not taken and compensation not paid within five years of the award.
BAL KISHAN v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings pending for over five years without possession or compensation under the 1894 Act are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act.
M/S MKM ESTATES PVT LTD v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act where possession was not taken and compensation not paid within five years of the award are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
Hazel Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession and compensation are not completed within five years of the award.
Nitin Sawhney v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if no possession or compensation occurs within five years prior to the 2013 Act's commencement.
Preet Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act without possession or compensation for over five years before the 2013 Act are deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
M/S SOPAN REAL ESTATE (P) LTD v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if no possession or compensation occurs within five years of the award.
Ravinder Kumar v. Govt. of NCT Delhi
Recovery of alleged excess pay from a Group-C employee retiring within one year is impermissible without prior undertaking, quashing the recovery order under State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih.
Vodafone India Ltd. and Ors. v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India
The Delhi High Court held that TRAI's refusal to share the cost model during consultation on interconnection charges does not violate its statutory duty of transparency under Section 11(4) of the TRAI Act, dismissing the petition challenging the process.
The Chief Executive Officer J and K Era Srinagar Kashmir v. Abhiram Infra Projects Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that arbitration seated in Delhi is governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 notwithstanding the contract's governing law being Jammu and Kashmir law, and dismissed the petitioner's challenge based on the Jammu and Kashmir Arbitration Act.
Mangalmay Institute of Management & Technology v. GGSIP University
The Delhi High Court struck down the moratorium on affiliation of new educational institutions in NCR outside Delhi imposed by the Government and University as arbitrary, discriminatory, and ultra vires the governing Act, directing consideration of affiliation applications on merits.
Union of India and Ors. v. Ravi Shankar Kumar Sinha
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's quashing of a dismissal order where the disciplinary authority's disagreement note was conclusive rather than tentative and critical evidence was not properly proved, emphasizing adherence to natural justice in departmental proceedings.
K.L. Enterprises LLP & Ors. v. Bajaj Finance Limited
The Delhi High Court granted interim protection restraining the sale of pledged shares by the lender during the Covid-19 pandemic, balancing contractual rights with regulatory moratoriums and pandemic-induced hardships pending arbitration.
NAV CHETNA KALYAN SAMITI v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that no road exists at the disputed site in the approved layout plan and that in-principle regularization of an unauthorized colony does not imply approval of the disputed road.
Neelam Srivastava v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, without possession or compensation for over five years before the 2013 Act, are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, granting the petitioners a declaration of lapse.
National Highways Authority of India v. Yedeshi Aurangabad Tollway Limited
The Delhi High Court held that stay of an arbitral money award requires 100% deposit or security as per amended Section 36(3) and CPC principles, dismissing NHAI's stay application against a ₹1503 crore award in favor of Yedeshi.
Someshwar Dayal v. Anupama Dayal
The Delhi High Court held that a spouse cannot withdraw a guardianship petition and continue to benefit from interim custody orders, allowing the other spouse to be transposed as petitioner to protect the children's welfare.
Delhi Diocesan Trust Association v. Edwin William & Anr
The High Court upheld the Trial Court's orders dismissing the petitioner's claim of fraudulent suit withdrawal, holding that the power of attorney was not legally revoked and no prima facie fraud was established.