Delhi High Court
93,075 judgments
delivered on: 19th November, 2014 W.P. (C) No. 5362/2013 v. CORAM:
The Delhi High Court held that the EPF Act applies to the petitioner establishment from the date it first employed 20 or more persons, directing reassessment of dues from September 1990 onwards, and affirmed that non-profit status does not exempt applicability.
Mr.Pankaj Kumar Singh, Advocate. v. GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY & ORS. .....
The Delhi High Court allowed admission beyond the cut-off date to a meritorious candidate prevented by emergency duty, emphasizing fairness and duty of authorities to fill super speciality course vacancies.
RAJKUMAR DYEING & PRINTING WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR v. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ANR
Delhi High Court set aside CCI's disproportionate penalty imposed for non-filing of undertakings when substantive cease and desist orders were complied with, emphasizing the doctrine of proportionality under Article 14.
RAJKUMAR DYEING & PRINTING WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR v. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ANR
Delhi High Court set aside disproportionate penalties imposed by CCI for non-filing of compliance undertakings, emphasizing the doctrine of proportionality and reasoned exercise of administrative discretion.
M/S. PANORAMA EXPORTS PVT. LTD v. NANDU BHARDWAJ AND ORS
The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte labour award due to improper service of summons and violation of natural justice, allowing the respondents to re-initiate proceedings with proper notice.
Mr. S.D.Ansari, Adv. v. SMT. SHIV RANI & ORS. ......
The Delhi High Court upheld eviction of a tenant under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, holding that the landlord's bonafide need was established and bald tenant assertions without evidence do not create triable issues.
Mr. R.P. Luthra, Advocate. v. DHARMENDRA, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience in allotting alternative land, holding that absence of recorded ownership and compliance with court directions negated the claim.
Commissioner of Income Tax – IV v. Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that payments for live telecast of horse races do not constitute royalty under the Income Tax Act and are not subject to tax deduction at source under Section 194J.
Mr.Mukesh Birla, Advocate v. STATE .....
The Delhi High Court modified the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder based on the nature of injuries and intention inferred, reducing the sentence accordingly.
Mr.Mukesh Birla, Advocate v. STATE .....
The Delhi High Court reduced the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, holding that the injuries inflicted were not sufficient to prove intention to kill, and sentenced the appellants to the period already undergone.
Mr. G.D. Bhandari, Advocate. v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....
The Delhi High Court held that acquittal in criminal proceedings does not mandate automatic review of departmental penalties and dismissed the petition seeking restoration of seniority and service benefits.
VASU DEV PAHWA & ANR v. For the
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if the award was made over five years ago and possession or compensation is lacking, regardless of stay orders preventing possession.
Mr. Prakash Gautam, Advocate. v. SHRI KEWAL .....
The court held that possession taken through due process of law is protected and a person without settled possession cannot claim illegal dispossession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
Mohd. Ikram, Adv. v. SHRI ABDUL SALAM & ANR. ......
The Delhi High Court dismissed appellants' claim of independent title based on unregistered and unstamped documents, holding them invalid under amended Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act and an abuse of process, thereby allowing execution of the decree.
Mr. Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anil K. Pruthi, Advocate. v. DHANPAT RAI AND ORS. .....
The Delhi High Court upheld eviction on bonafide necessity grounds, holding that less suitable alternative accommodation does not entitle a tenant to leave to defend under the Delhi Rent Control Act.
Ms. Sangeeta jain, Advocate with petitioners in person v. STATE & ANR .....
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 506, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes on the basis of an amicable settlement and mutual divorce, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Mr. M. Sufian Siddiqui, Mr. Rakesh Bhugra, Mr. M.Tabishzia, Advocates. v. HAKIM ZILLUR REHMAN ......
The Delhi High Court held that service of summons can validly terminate a monthly tenancy under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, allowing the landlord's suit for possession despite tenant's oral agreement and construction claims.
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD ..... Through v. HARI OM & ORS .....
The Delhi High Court dismissed appeals challenging a motor accident compensation award, affirming insurer and driver liability, correcting multiplier application for dependency loss, and enhancing injury compensation.
W.P.(C) 4079/2014 v. 2,3,5,6
The Delhi High Court held that the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 overrides other enactments and applies to the University of Delhi until exemption under Section 5 is granted, dismissing the petition challenging gratuity payment orders.
Through: Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Advocate v. M/S. BPTP LTD. & ANR
The Delhi High Court held that pre-arbitration mutual discussion clauses are generally directory, allowing arbitration invocation despite non-compliance, but directed parties to attempt mutual discussion within a reasonable time before arbitration proceeds.