Delhi High Court

82,305 judgments

Year:

Gurcharan Singh v. Punjab & Sind Bank

30 Apr 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:3946

The Delhi High Court held that terminal benefits under VRS can be withheld only pending valid disciplinary proceedings and directed the bank to pay the petitioner delayed dues with interest from the date the disciplinary order became final.

civil petition_allowed Significant Voluntary Retirement Scheme terminal benefits departmental proceedings conditional acceptance

Prof. A.K. Mittal v. Registrar, Indian Institute of Technology & Anr

30 Apr 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:3945

The Delhi High Court held that disciplinary inquiry under CCS rules into sexual harassment allegations is valid alongside the Sexual Harassment Act, and directed a fresh hearing before the Board of Governors with procedural safeguards, rejecting premature judicial intervention.

administrative other Significant Board of Governors Inquiry Officer jurisdiction Sexual Harassment Act 2013 CCS (CCA) Rules 1965

VLS FINANCE LTD v. SOUTHEND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD

30 Apr 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:3913-DB

An appeal under section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act does not lie against an order passed in contempt proceedings as such orders are not passed in exercise of ordinary original civil jurisdiction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi High Court Act, 1966 Section 10 appeal ordinary original civil jurisdiction contempt jurisdiction

M/s Arun International v. State of Delhi & Anr.

30 Apr 2015 · Manmohan Singh, J. · 2015:DHC:3951

The Delhi High Court held that once proceedings under Section 138 NI Act have advanced to Section 145(2) or mediation settlement, the trial court has jurisdiction and the complaint cannot be returned for want of territorial jurisdiction.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act territorial jurisdiction mediation settlement Section 145(2) Negotiable Instruments Act

M/s Arun International v. State of Delhi & Anr.

30 Apr 2015 · Manmohan Singh · 2015:DHC:3952

The Delhi High Court held that once a Section 138 NI Act complaint reaches the stage of framing notice or evidence, the trial court must proceed regardless of territorial jurisdiction objections, and mediation settlements are binding decrees.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act territorial jurisdiction mediation settlement Section 145(2) NI Act

M/s Arun International v. State of Delhi & Anr.

30 Apr 2015 · Manmohan Singh, J. · 2015:DHC:3953

The Delhi High Court held that once a cheque dishonour complaint under Section 138 has proceeded beyond initial stages, the trial court has jurisdiction to try the case despite territorial objections, and mediation settlements are binding and enforceable.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act territorial jurisdiction mediation settlement Section 145(2) Negotiable Instruments Act

Rahul Makol & Ors. v. State & Anr.

30 Apr 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:3937

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes on the ground of amicable settlement, applying the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of court process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Akash Rajput v. The State & Anr.

30 Apr 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:3938

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute upon amicable settlement between the parties, applying the principles of inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

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

Sat Prakash @ Lala v. State (GNCT of Delhi)

30 Apr 2015 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015:DHC:3932-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of appellants for kidnapping and murder based on reliable last seen and circumstantial evidence, motive, and failure to explain incriminating circumstances, while acquitting the third accused for lack of evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen evidence motive Section 302 IPC

Sat Prakash @ Lala v. State (GNCT of Delhi)

30 Apr 2015 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015:DHC:3933-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of appellants for kidnapping and murder based on reliable last seen and circumstantial evidence, while affirming the acquittal of a co-accused due to lack of evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen theory motive Section 302 IPC

Sat Prakash @ Lala v. State (GNCT of Delhi)

30 Apr 2015 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015 DHC 3929-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the convictions of appellants Sat Prakash and Mahesh for abduction and murder based on circumstantial and last seen evidence, while affirming the acquittal of respondent Satish due to lack of evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen theory motive Section 302 IPC

M/S APPACHES SECURITY & ALLIED SERVICES PRIVATE LTD. v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

30 Apr 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:3934

The Delhi High Court held that a government company is excluded from the licensing requirements of the Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005, and dismissed the petition challenging the contract awarded to such a company for security services.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005 government company license under Section 4 private security agency definition

Pawan Kumar Sikka v. Poonam Sehgal

30 Apr 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:3931

The court allowed withdrawal of a decree enforcement petition after parties amicably settled their disputes and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.

civil petition_dismissed decree enforcement withdrawal of petition amicable settlement leave to withdraw

Kamlesh Kaur Sherma & Anr v. Hemanshu Malhotra & Ors

30 Apr 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:3942

The Delhi High Court allowed the impleadment of the widow of the original owner as a necessary and proper party in a suit for possession and ownership of a property floor, emphasizing the court's discretion under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC to ensure complete adjudication.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order I Rule 10(2) CPC impleadment necessary party proper party

Ashok Sharma v. Vijay Kumar Gupta

30 Apr 2015 · Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:3930

The Delhi High Court held that during pendency of stay or revision petitions against eviction, payment of court-ordered user charges discharges the tenant's liability, and nonpayment of rent alone does not justify eviction.

property petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 eviction nonpayment of rent user charges

Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. M/S Dampskibsselskabet Norden A/S

30 Apr 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:3962-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of Notices of Readiness issued despite one non-functional crane, clarifying that laytime commencement and discharge rate reduction are governed by separate contract clauses.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Contract of Affreightment Notice of Readiness laytime demurrage

Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Shri Gyan Prakash Agarwal & Anr.

30 Apr 2015 · Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. · 2015:DHC:3914-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld professional misconduct against a Chartered Accountant but modified the punishment from one-month removal from the register to a reprimand, emphasizing proportionality and procedural fairness.

professional_regulatory sentence_modified Significant Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 professional misconduct disciplinary proceedings principles of natural justice

Reeta v. State (NCT of Delhi)

30 Apr 2015 · Sunita Gupta · 2015:DHC:3921

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a woman for abducting and sexually exploiting a minor girl, emphasizing the reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony despite minor inconsistencies and modifying the sentence to the period already served.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant sexual exploitation minor prosecutrix Section 366A IPC Section 376 IPC

Mohinder Puri v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd. and Anr.

30 Apr 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2015:DHC:3922-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the lower court's decision in a commercial contract dispute, emphasizing strict contractual interpretation and limited appellate interference.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant commercial contract dispute contractual obligations appellate interference burden of proof

Mohinder Puri v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd. and Anr.

30 Apr 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2015:DHC:3923-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the contractual obligations and dismissed appeals challenging the lower courts' findings in a commercial dispute between Puri Construction and Larsen & Toubro.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant contractual dispute performance of contract damages appellate review