Delhi High Court

82,305 judgments

Year:

SPML INFRA LIMITED v. GRAPHITE INDIA LIMITED

31 Oct 2014 · Jyoti Singh · 2020:DHC:1074

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging an arbitral award due to failure to show sufficient cause for delay beyond the strict limitation period and held that fundamental filing defects render the petition invalid to stop limitation.

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

Microsoft Corporation & Anr v. M/S Ajel Technologies Pvt Ltd & Anr

28 Oct 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2015:DHC:8917

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction against defendants for unauthorized use of pirated Microsoft software, based on unrebutted evidence and defendants' failure to appear.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed copyright infringement software piracy permanent injunction ex parte decree

Jiwan Ram v. Union of India

14 Oct 2014 · C. Hari Shankar; Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2024:DHC:8096-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court directed grant of one notional increment for pension calculation to a retired government employee, subject to the outcome of a pending Supreme Court Review Petition.

administrative petition_allowed Significant notional increment pension calculation retirement benefits Department of Personnel & Training

M/S. TULIP FASHIONS (P) LTD. v. Union of India

28 Sep 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:8108-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession and compensation are not effected within five years prior to the 2013 Act's commencement.

property petition_allowed Significant land acquisition Section 24(2) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894

PNB Housing Finance Ltd v. Ms. Pinky Aggarwal & Ors.

26 Sep 2014 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:6990
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 upon finding a valid arbitration agreement and timely petition, directing disputes to arbitration.

civil appeal_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(5) Section 21 notice arbitration agreement

Sudesh Verma v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

22 Sep 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:7972-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act with an award made over five years before the 2013 Act, without possession or compensation, are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) of 2013 Act Land Acquisition Act 1894 acquisition proceedings lapse possession and compensation

M/S M.R. TOWERS PVT. LTD. v. Union of India and Ors

22 Sep 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:7976-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

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.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings possession not taken

Bhim Singh v. Govt of NCT of Delhi

19 Sep 2014 · C. Hari Shankar; Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2024:DHC:8114-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 7

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.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Fundamental Rule 49(iii) Store Keeper look-after charge pay entitlement

Rakesh and Anr v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors

08 Sep 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:7423-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

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.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings possession and compensation

BAL KISHAN v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

08 Sep 2014 · BADAR DURREZ AHMED; SANJEEV SACHDEVA · 2015:DHC:7420-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

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.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings possession and compensation

M/S MKM ESTATES PVT LTD v. Union of India and Ors.

08 Sep 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:7424-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

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.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) of 2013 Act Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings physical possession

Hazel Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.

08 Sep 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:7432-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

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.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings possession and compensation

Nitin Sawhney v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

08 Sep 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:7434-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

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.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings

Preet Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

08 Sep 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:7429-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

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.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 lapse of acquisition proceedings

M/S SOPAN REAL ESTATE (P) LTD v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

08 Sep 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:7431-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

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.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act Land Acquisition Act, 1894 acquisition proceedings lapse physical possession

Ravinder Kumar v. Govt. of NCT Delhi

08 Sep 2014 · C. Hari Shankar; Amit Sharma · 2024:DHC:9122-DB

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.

administrative petition_allowed Significant excess payment recovery Assured Career Progression Scheme Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme Group-C employees

Vodafone India Ltd. and Ors. v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India

04 Sep 2014 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2017:DHC:5063
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

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.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Mobile Termination Charges Interconnection Usage Charges Transparency

The Chief Executive Officer J and K Era Srinagar Kashmir v. Abhiram Infra Projects Pvt Ltd

01 Sep 2014 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5880

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.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant seat of arbitration curial law governing law Jammu and Kashmir Arbitration Act, 1997

Mangalmay Institute of Management & Technology v. GGSIP University

31 Aug 2014 · V. Kameswar Rao, J · 2017:DHC:3119

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.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant affiliation Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Act, 1998 National Capital Region moratorium

Union of India and Ors. v. Ravi Shankar Kumar Sinha

26 Aug 2014 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025 SCC OnLine Del 1244
Cites 3 · Cited by 366

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.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disagreement note departmental inquiry natural justice proof of documents