Delhi High Court

82,660 judgments

Year:

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. GARGI SINGH & ORS

06 May 2015 · G. P. Mittal · 2015:DHC:4122

The Delhi High Court held that an insurer cannot avoid liability for compensation merely because the driver’s licence was fake if the insured exercised reasonable care in verifying the licence and driver’s competence.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant motor accident claim insurance liability driving licence fake licence

M/S. ARJUN DAIRY PVT. LTD. v. M/S. GOD COUNTY EDEN HOMES PVT. LTD.

06 May 2015 · G. P. Mittal · 2015:DHC:4118

The Delhi High Court held that disputes involving third parties not bound by an arbitration agreement cannot be referred to arbitration, and dismissed the defendant's application to refer the suit to arbitration.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement Section 8 Arbitration and Conciliation Act license agreement maintenance charges

S.S.PULSES MANUFACTURING PVT.LTD. v. GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI

06 May 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:4115

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner’s writ petition directing de-sealing of premises subject to a binding undertaking to comply with zoning regulations and cease industrial operations.

administrative appeal_allowed writ of mandamus de-sealing of premises undertaking Master Plan-2021

M. Murugesan v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.

06 May 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:4114

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging appointments to Hindi Officer posts, holding that courts will not interfere with selection committee decisions absent illegality or mala fide, and administrative exigency justified appointment of Assistant Hindi Officers without separate advertisement.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Selection Committee Judicial interference Appointment Bias

Durga Precision Udyog v. Siya Ram Tiwari

06 May 2015 · V. P. Vaish · 2015:DHC:4113

The Delhi High Court modified a Labour Court award by holding that a workman who voluntarily abandoned service and executed a full and final settlement is entitled to back wages only up to the date of abandonment, limiting relief under the Industrial Disputes Act.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 illegal termination back wages full and final settlement

Durga Precision Udyog v. Siya Ram Tiwari

06 May 2015 · V. P. Vaish · 2015:DHC:4117

The Delhi High Court modified a Labour Court award by holding that a workman who voluntarily left employment and executed full and final settlement cannot claim illegal termination and back wages beyond the date of separation.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 illegal termination back wages full and final settlement

Sunita Goel v. GNCT of Delhi and Ors.

06 May 2015 · Vibhu BakhrU, J · 2015:DHC:4097

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a liquor license renewal, holding that repealed rules cannot be invoked and that the dispute was essentially a private landlord-tenant matter not maintainable under public law.

administrative petition_dismissed Delhi Liquor License Rules 1976 Delhi Excise Rules 2010 liquor license renewal public law remedy

Pallavi Sinha v. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University

06 May 2015 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2015:DHC:4098

The Delhi High Court clarified the correct implementation of the Roster Point system in medical admissions, upheld eligibility criteria interpretation despite typographical errors, but declined relief to petitioners due to equity considerations.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Roster Point system Reservation in medical admissions OBC creamy layer Admission eligibility

Shri G.R. Malhotra & Anr. v. Canara Bank & Others

06 May 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:4096-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed amendment of pleadings and set aside recovery orders to enable the Debts Recovery Tribunal to adjudicate disputed claims arising from equitable mortgage enhancements after the petitioners' purchase of the property.

civil appeal_allowed Significant equitable mortgage SARFAESI Act Transfer of Property Act due diligence

Babita Rawat & Anr. v. State & Anr.

06 May 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:4100

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under the Income Tax Act based on an amicable settlement between estranged spouses, applying the principles of Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in non-heinous offences.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement Income Tax Act offences

Tarun Saxena v. State & Anr.

06 May 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:4101

The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC based on an amicable settlement, 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 matrimonial dispute Section 498-A IPC

Sonia v. State

06 May 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:4102

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 323, 506, 341, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC compromise deed amicable settlement

Prince Kumar & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

06 May 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:4103

The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and mutual divorce, applying its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498-A IPC

Dinesh Kumar Tyagi & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

06 May 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:4104

The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC on the basis of amicable settlement between parties, applying the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498-A IPC

Jasbir & Ors. v. State & Anr.

06 May 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:4105

The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC based on a bona fide mediated settlement, affirming the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in such cases.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498-A IPC

Vidyut Kesh Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi

06 May 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:4106

The High Court held that a Revisional Court cannot discharge accused by pre-judging evidence and restored the trial court’s order to proceed with the trial in FIR No. 103/2010.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant discharge of accused Section 161 CrPC counter blast FIR appreciation of evidence

Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation v. Steel Authority of India Limited

06 May 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2015:DHC:4110
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging an arbitral award for being filed beyond the permissible limitation period under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that delay beyond 30 days cannot be condoned.

civil petition_dismissed Arbitral award Section 34(3) Arbitration and Conciliation Act Condonation of delay Limitation period

Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation v. Steel Authority of India Limited

06 May 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2015:DHC:4109
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging an arbitral award for being filed beyond the permissible limitation period under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, reaffirming that delay beyond 30 days after three months cannot be condoned.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34(3) condonation of delay limitation period

Ashok Engineering Corporation v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.

06 May 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2015:DHC:4108

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging an arbitral award on limitation grounds and refused to condone delay in re-filing due to insufficient explanation, affirming the principle of expeditious arbitration.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 condonation of delay limitation

M/S. MAPSA TAPES PRIVATE LTD. v. DELHI STATE INDUSTRIAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.

06 May 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:4116

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking to shift the ground rent commencement date, holding that contractual disputes with arbitration clauses are not amenable to writ relief and that courts cannot modify clear contract terms in such proceedings.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant writ petition Article 226 arbitration agreement ground rent