Delhi High Court

93,453 judgments

Year:

National Highways Authority of India v. Afcons Infrastructure Ltd & Afcons Pauling (India) Ltd

28 Jan 2015 · S. Muralidhar · 2015:DHC:816

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award directing NHAI to reimburse enhanced royalty charges incurred by the contractor during the extended contract period, clarifying that such increases post-bid submission are employer's liability under the contract.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award Enhanced Royalty Charges Contract Extension Price Adjustment Clause

Seema Swami v. IHHR Hospitality Pvt. Ltd

28 Jan 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:815-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld an interim order restraining the appellant from receiving rent from disputed property and directing deposit of rent with the Court to preserve the subject matter pending suit resolution.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXXVIII CPC Section 151 CPC interim injunction protective order

CIT v. Transceivers India Ltd

28 Jan 2015 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; R.K. GAUBA · 2015:DHC:863-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed if the assessee furnishes a bona fide explanation supported by evidence, even if expenditure is disallowed on merits.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 271(1)(c) Income Tax Act, 1961 penalty inaccurate particulars

National Buildings Construction Corporation Limited v. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner & Ors.

27 Jan 2015 · V. P. Vaish · 2015:DHC:11516

The Delhi High Court restrained coercive recovery against the petitioner pending disposal of the restoration application before the EPF Appellate Tribunal, which could not proceed due to absence of a Presiding Officer.

administrative other Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal restoration of appeal condonation of delay bank guarantee

Supreme Court in Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union and v. Anr., 2013(11) SCALE 329

27 Jan 2015 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2015:DHC:11518

The Delhi High Court held that disputes regarding street vendors' status under the Street Vendors Act, 2014 must be decided by the Town Vending Committee, directing its constitution and functioning, and refused to grant injunctions restraining eviction before certification.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Street Vendors Act 2014 Section 3(3) Town Vending Committee injunction

P K Gadodia v. Madan Gopal Maheshwari

27 Jan 2015 · S. P. Garg · 2015:DHC:11232

The Delhi High Court allowed criminal revision petitions and acquitted the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the basis of a full and final settlement between the parties.

criminal appeal_allowed Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act compoundable offence criminal revision petition settlement

M/S. Qualcomm Incorporated v. The Assistant Director of Income Tax

27 Jan 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R.K. Gauba · 2015:DHC:11021-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed multiple income tax appeals filed by Qualcomm Incorporated as withdrawn upon the appellant's request.

tax appeal_dismissed Procedural appeal withdrawal income tax appeals dismissal as withdrawn High Court of Delhi

S Sarup Singh & Ors. v. The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

27 Jan 2015 · Manmohan Singh · 2015:DHC:10728

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties and consent of the complainant.

criminal petition_allowed Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 498-A IPC Section 406 IPC

Krishan Kumar & Anr. v. State of Delhi & Ors.

27 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:10690

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking quashing of an FIR under Sections 498A/34 IPC at the fag end of trial, directing the trial court to consider affidavits filed by respondents.

criminal petition_dismissed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Section 34 IPC fag end of trial

Saroj Bala Sharvja & Ors v. State & Anr

27 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:10677

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking quashing of FIR and related orders but allowed termination of proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC upon payment of costs, restoring petitioners' bail bonds.

criminal appeal_dismissed quashing of FIR Section 420 IPC Section 468 IPC Section 471 IPC

Shweta Aggarwal & Ors. v. State (The Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

27 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:10659

The Delhi High Court refused to quash FIR No. 110/2014 and directed completion of investigation within 12 weeks, granting petitioners liberty to pursue other remedies.

criminal other quashing of FIR investigation Section 420 IPC Section 467 IPC

M/S SAI SOFT SECURITIES LTD v. MANJU AHLUWALIA

27 Jan 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2015:DHC:752

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award holding the petitioner liable for unauthorized trading, affirmed the Arbitral Tribunal's jurisdiction under NSE bye-laws, and rejected the petitioner's challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral Tribunal jurisdiction Corporate veil lifting Member-Constituent agreement Investor grievance redressal

Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr

27 Jan 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:10650

The Delhi High Court disposed of the petition seeking quashing of FIR for compoundable offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, allowing parties liberty to compound the offences and end proceedings.

criminal appeal_dismissed quashing of FIR compoundable offences Section 406 IPC Section 420 IPC

INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION LTD (IRCTC) v. M/S SRINATHJI CATERERS

27 Jan 2015 · V. KAMESWAR RAO · 2015:DHC:750

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award directing IRCTC to refund security deposits to a caterer, emphasizing limited judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and validating the arbitrator's contract interpretation and findings on operational hindrances.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 arbitral award contract interpretation

SIKARIA MEGA FOOD PARK(P) LTD v. UNION OF INDIA

27 Jan 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2015:DHC:753

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking interim injunction restraining termination of a Mega Food Park agreement, holding that a determinable contract with termination clauses cannot be specifically enforced before a final decision is taken.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Specific Relief Act, 1963 contract termination preliminary notice

Prof. D.K. Sengupta v. Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi

27 Jan 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:767

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition filed after nine years, holding that a retired employee not subscribed to the medical scheme post-retirement is not entitled to reimbursement and delay barred the petition.

administrative petition_dismissed writ petition Article 226 delay and laches medical reimbursement

Sunita Bajaj v. State

27 Jan 2015 · A.K. Pathak · 2015:DHC:10560

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the petitioner in a fraud case, holding that mere inclusion in the FIR without direct involvement does not justify denial of bail.

criminal bail_granted bail application fraud collusion FIR

M/S SANTOSH INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

27 Jan 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:769-DB
Cites 1 · 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 compensation is unpaid, and the 2014 Amendment Ordinance cannot retrospectively affect vested rights.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 land acquisition compensation payment vesting rights

Sattar Mohammad v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

27 Jan 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:807-DB
Cites 1 · 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 compensation is not tendered to landowners within five years, and that mere deposit in court does not constitute payment.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) of 2013 Act land acquisition compensation payment deposit in court

Union of India v. K. Narasimha

27 Jan 2015 · Kailash Gambhir; I.S. Mehta · 2015:DHC:812-DB

The Delhi High Court remanded a disciplinary proceedings case involving an AGMUT cadre officer to the CAT for reconsideration in light of a recent authoritative decision clarifying that vigilance and disciplinary matters are to be dealt with by the Ministry of Home Affairs under AIS (D&A) Rules.

administrative other Significant AGMUT Cadre disciplinary proceedings vigilance cases Joint Cadre Authority