Delhi High Court
93,453 judgments
Ved Prakash Singh v. R C Jain & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed contempt petitions alleging violation of a settlement order regarding employment status, directing petitioners to seek relief through appropriate legal proceedings.
Ved Prakash Singh v. R C Jain & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed contempt petitions alleging violation of a settlement order regarding employment status, holding that the petitioners were not permanent employees until completion of probation and directing them to seek appropriate relief through proper legal proceedings.
Ved Prakash Singh v. R C Jain & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed contempt petitions alleging violation of a settlement order regarding employment status, holding that the respondents complied with the order and disputes should be resolved through appropriate petitions.
Rajesh Kumar Giri & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the Ministry of Home Affairs to amend the BSF Air Wing Officers Recruitment Rules to protect existing promotion eligibility rights of employees adversely affected by enhanced service requirements, in line with DOPT guidelines.
Mohit Kumar v. Vimal Dhasmana and Anr
The Delhi High Court held that a valid undertaking not to dispossess without due process remains binding despite withdrawal of an earlier suit, rendering a fresh suit for permanent injunction on the same property not maintainable.
Mother Dairy Fruit & Vegetable Private Limited v. Hatim Ali
The Delhi High Court held that Mother Dairy Fruit & Vegetable Private Limited is a public authority under the RTI Act as it is substantially controlled and financed by the Central Government through NDDB.
Mother Dairy Fruit & Vegetable Private Limited v. Hatim Ali & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that Mother Dairy Fruit & Vegetable Private Limited is a public authority under the RTI Act as it is substantially financed and controlled by the Central Government through NDDB.
Union of India v. Rakesh Kumar & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation, refusing to condone unexplained delays of 240 days in filing and 320 days in re-filing the appeal by the government appellant.
Ritu Bhatia v. Ministry of Civil Supplies, Consumer Affairs, and Public Distribution
The Delhi High Court upheld termination of a Company Secretary for lacking the prescribed five years experience, holding that strict compliance with recruitment rules is mandatory and no estoppel arises from prior acceptance of deficient appointment.
Shamsher Gujjar @ Choudhary v. Sartaj Hotel Apartments and Villas Pvt Ltd & Others
The Delhi High Court held that a signed MoU containing an arbitration clause constitutes a valid arbitration agreement despite blanks, and criminal proceedings do not bar appointment of an arbitrator or arbitration.
Delhi Development Authority v. M/S Satish Steel Traders and Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed condonation of delay for a government body in filing appeal, set aside a perverse trial court decree passed without framing issues, and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
State v. Mahadev & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a dowry death case, holding that the prosecution failed to prove cruelty or harassment soon before death in connection with dowry demand as required under Section 304-B IPC.
Chander Sain v. Government 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 compensation remains unpaid for five years, and such statutory rights cannot be retrospectively nullified by an ordinance.
Gurbakshish Singh Batra v. Government 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 compensation remains unpaid for five years, and such rights cannot be retrospectively negated by the 2014 Ordinance.
SHRI PRABHU DAYAL AGGARWAL AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act, acquisition proceedings lapse if possession and compensation are not completed within five years, and this benefit extends to subsequent purchasers.
Ram Sumiran Pal v. State
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's interim bail application in a large-scale financial fraud case involving Speak Asia, emphasizing the balance between accused's rights and investigation needs while granting liberty to renew bail after further investigation.
K.P. Shantirao v. Union of India
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, and this benefit extends to subsequent purchasers.
Deepak Seth & Anr v. Union of India and Anr
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act pending without possession or compensation for over five years before the 2013 Act commenced are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
Ramesh v. Union of India & 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 compensation is not paid within five years of the award, regardless of possession claims.
Om Shivay Enterprises v. The Chief Commissioner of Customs & Ors.
The court directed the Ministry of Environment and Forests to determine whether imported second-hand copier machines constitute hazardous waste before clearance, emphasizing adherence to policy and judicial precedents.