Delhi High Court
93,075 judgments
Through : Mr. Santosh Kumar and Mr.Madhurendra Sharma, Advocates v. MUNSHI KAMRUDDIN (SINCE DECEASED) THR BISHMILLA KHATOON & ANR
The Delhi High Court set aside the appellate court's remand order and directed it to decide the appeal on merits, reaffirming that remand is impermissible when sufficient evidence exists on record.
Mr. Umesh Sharma, Adv. v. DELHI UNIVERSITY & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of University rules prescribing maximum span periods for course completion, dismissed challenges to the discontinuation of exemptions beyond such periods, and directed Universities to reconsider their policies in a reasoned manner.
Mr. Sidhanth Panda, Mr.Priyabrat Sahu, Advocates. v. SAT PAL & ORS .....
The Delhi High Court upheld compensation awarded in a land acquisition case, condoned delay in substitution of legal heirs, and dismissed the Union of India's appeal relying on parity with a precedent case.
PRADEEP CHHABRA v. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION AND ANR
The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a cut-off date denying post-retirement medical benefits to employees resigning after 23.07.2003, holding that no vested rights accrued without contribution and the cut-off date was not arbitrary under Article 14.
Through: Mr. Manoj Ohri, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Himanshu Aggarwal, Adv v. M/S FUSION TELELINKS & ANR
The High Court set aside the order allowing cross-examination after closure of defence evidence and remanded the matter for fresh hearing to ensure fair opportunity to both parties.
Sh. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. v. THE COMMISSIONER NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. .....
The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's order validating the third respondent's promotion as Assistant Director (Horticulture), ruling that the appointing authority's interpretation of recruitment qualifications was reasonable and the petitioners lacked locus standi to challenge it.
Mr. Umesh Sharma, Adv. v. DELHI UNIVERSITY & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court upheld university rules prescribing maximum span periods for course completion, dismissed challenges to denial of extensions beyond such periods, and directed universities to reconsider their policies in light of modern educational needs.
Mr. Umesh Sharma, Adv. v. DELHI UNIVERSITY & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court upheld Universities' authority to enforce maximum span periods for course completion, dismissed challenges to notifications discontinuing exemptions beyond such periods, and directed Universities to reconsider their policies in light of contemporary educational needs.
Mr.S.K.Singh, Advocate. v. SH.PRABHU DAYAL ......
The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of tenants on bonafide necessity grounds, holding the respondent as lawful owner and landlord, rejecting petitioners' claim of ownership by adverse possession.
Mr. Umesh Sharma, Adv. v. DELHI UNIVERSITY & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court upheld Universities' authority to enforce maximum course completion periods, dismissed students' appeals for relaxation beyond prescribed span periods, and directed Universities to reconsider their policies in light of modern educational needs.
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Through Mr.Shoumik Mazumdar, Adv. for Mr.K.L.Nandwani, Adv. v. BHARAT THAKUR & ORS .....
The Delhi High Court held that an insurer must pay compensation to claimants for deaths of gratuitous passengers in a goods vehicle and may recover the amount later from the owner and driver, following Supreme Court precedent.
Mr. Umesh Sharma, Adv. v. DELHI UNIVERSITY & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of University regulations prescribing maximum span periods for course completion and held that Universities have no obligation to grant exemptions beyond such periods, directing Universities to reconsider their policies in light of modern educational needs.
Mr. Umesh Sharma, Adv. v. DELHI UNIVERSITY & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court upheld university regulations prescribing maximum span periods for course completion, rejecting students' claims for exemptions beyond those periods and directing universities to reconsider their policies.
Mr. Umesh Sharma, Adv. v. DELHI UNIVERSITY & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court upheld universities' authority to enforce maximum course completion periods, dismissed challenges to denial of exam chances beyond such periods, and directed reconsideration of span period policies.
W.P.(C) 3474/2012 & & CM No. 12289/2013 v. GOVT. OF NCT DELHI AND ANR
The High Court set aside the Labour Court's reinstatement order of a workman alleging illegal termination, holding that the employer proved voluntary resignation and payment of dues, while emphasizing the need for proper confrontation of documents to uphold natural justice.
th November, 2014 PAWAN KUMAR AGGARWAL ..... Through Mr. Mukul Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vibhor Garg, Mr. Aseem Swaroop and Ms. Suvarna Kashyap, Advocates. v. INCOME TAX OFFICER .....
The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's finding that a purported gift from a non-resident stranger was not genuine, affirming the addition of Rs. 1 lakh as income from undisclosed sources under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
Mr. Umesh Sharma, Adv. v. DELHI UNIVERSITY & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of University rules prescribing maximum span periods for course completion, denying students' claims for relaxation beyond such periods, while directing Universities to reconsider their policies in light of contemporary educational needs.
941ccc6e93c7d8a9bd63be030b76f9d7be9eddda149f8f77ff346d3cdd7e8c9f
The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, ensuring statutory compliance and protecting Income Tax Department's rights.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate with petitioners. v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS .....
The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs involving serious offences under IPC on the basis of amicable settlement between parties at an early investigation stage, subject to payment of costs.
Mr. Tabrej Ahmed, Advocate for the petitioners with petitioners in person. v. STATE & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties, applying its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.