Delhi High Court
93,877 judgments
UOI and Anr v. Jetha Ram and Ors
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the CAT order setting aside a promotional panel for Ticket Examiners, affirming that reservation in promotion requires compliance with conditions laid down in M. Nagraj and that SC/ST candidates promoted on merit must be counted against unreserved vacancies.
Rajesh Kumar v. Emporium Incharge Bharat Leather Corporation Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal upholding the validity of a departmental inquiry and termination of a workman, finding no procedural irregularity or violation of natural justice.
Alok Kumar v. Pawan Hans Ltd & Anr
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the dismissal of the writ petition, and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication permitting amendment to implead the Indian Air Force and clarify the nature of the appellant's appointment and termination.
Haryana Packaids Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that an arbitrator who fails to conclude proceedings within the stipulated time becomes functus officio and the court may appoint a substitute arbitrator to ensure expeditious arbitration.
KALMART SYSTEMS (M) SDN BHD v. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA LTD.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to enforce a foreign arbitral award due to absence of a concluded contract and valid arbitration agreement between the parties.
Vivek Rai v. Aakash Institute
The Delhi High Court set aside an ex parte arbitral award enforcing unconscionable and illegal employment contract clauses as opposed to public policy under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
Sambhavana v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that minimum 3% reservation for persons with disabilities must be equally distributed among three categories, allowed discretionary distribution beyond 3%, and mandated 20 minutes compensatory time per hour for visually impaired candidates using scribes.
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) v. Raj Kumar & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's leave petition against acquittal in a murder case, holding that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt based on unreliable last seen evidence and incomplete circumstantial proof.
Shahzeb Raza v. The State NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that requiring a landlord’s No Objection Certificate for de-sealing premises is unwarranted when occupation is established, and administrative authorities cannot adjudicate landlord-tenant disputes.
Holy Family Hospital v. Central Information Commission & Ors.
The Delhi High Court set aside the CIC's order directing disclosure under the RTI Act and remanded the matter for fresh determination of the petitioner's status as a public authority and related issues.
Rakesh Kumar Sharma v. Meena Bhatia & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's second appeal, affirming that tenancy rights inherited under the Delhi Rent Control Act are limited post statutory tenant's death, and eviction under ordinary civil law does not require notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act.
State v. Sumit @ Bachichi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's petition challenging the acquittal of accused due to suspicious arrest and recovery evidence, upholding the presumption of innocence and requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Prem Chand v. Rakesh Garg
The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of a commercial tenant under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, holding the landlord's bona fide requirement and lack of alternative accommodation were proved.
Shriram v. Bimla Rani
The Delhi High Court upheld an eviction order under the Delhi Rent Control Act, holding that the landlord need only prove a better right than the tenant and bona fide requirement, relying on judicial admissions and documentary evidence.
Zeeshan Mir & Ors. v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking quashing of the summoning order under Section 482 CrPC, holding that inherent jurisdiction should not be exercised where factual disputes require trial and the complaint is supported by witness statements.
Sudarshan Singh Shekhawat v. State
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279 and 427 IPC based on a mediated settlement and compensation, applying the principles of inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in non-heinous offences.
Shiv Kumar Yadav v. State
The Delhi High Court allowed recall of certain prosecution witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to ensure fair trial while upholding the trial court's day-to-day trial conduct under Section 309 Cr.P.C. and rejecting claims of counsel incompetence without evidence.
Ashok Vats & Ors. v. The State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute based on a fully complied mediated settlement, emphasizing the court's inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in such cases.
Royston Sequeira & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC based on an amicable settlement, applying the principles of Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.
Manoj Sehgal & Anr v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR against petitioners under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement, applying principles under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.