Delhi High Court

92,849 judgments

Year:

Government of NCT of Delhi v. Rajinder Singh

09 Oct 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vipin Sanghi · 2014:DHC:5221-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's order allowing a public servant to withdraw his voluntary retirement notice within reasonable time despite alleged misconduct, emphasizing fair consideration and procedural propriety.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant voluntary retirement withdrawal of resignation competent authority approval Rule 48(2) CCS Pension Rules

Sanovi Technologies (India) Pvt Ltd v. Aditya Shyam Bhatia and Ors

09 Oct 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:5222

The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiff's application to implead a closely connected company as a necessary party to a copyright infringement suit to ensure complete adjudication and avoid multiplicity of litigation.

civil other Significant Order I Rule 10 CPC impleadment necessary party copyright infringement

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. GURMEET KAUR & ORS.

09 Oct 2014 · JAYANT NATH · 2014:DHC:5230

The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal, affirming liability for compensation due to negligent driving of the Toyota Qualis and upholding the quantum of compensation including future prospects.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant motor accident claim rash and negligent driving contributory negligence compensation

Devender Singh v. Gian Prakash Saini

09 Oct 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5223

The Delhi High Court upheld eviction on bonafide necessity grounds, holding the landlord lacked suitable alternative accommodation and was entitled to evict the tenant.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 bonafide necessity eviction alternative accommodation leave to defend

DTC and Anr. v. Samida Begum and Ors.

09 Oct 2014 · JAYANT NATH · 2014:DHC:5225
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld negligence of the bus driver in a fatal accident but modified the compensation award based on correct income and multiplier calculations as per Supreme Court precedents.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim negligence compensation future prospects

ASI/M Madan Lal & Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.

09 Oct 2014 · Kailash Gambhir; Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:5227-DB

The Delhi High Court held that petitioners denied promotion due to an impossible Pharmacy Act registration requirement are entitled to be treated equally with similarly placed persons and granted promotion benefits retrospectively.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Promotion Pharmacy Act, 1948 Registration requirement Equal pay for equal work

A.K. Banerji & Ors v. State & Anr

07 Oct 2014 · Indermeet Kaur · 2014:DHC:5772

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal charges under Section 338 IPC against doctors, holding that final expert opinion by the Medical Council of India negated medical negligence and no prima facie case for criminal prosecution existed.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant medical negligence Section 338 IPC Medical Council of India Delhi Medical Council

Vandana Batra v. Aerens Goldsouk International Ltd.

01 Oct 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:5200

The Delhi High Court recalled a consent order referring a landlord-tenant dispute to arbitration based on an unregistered and inadequately stamped lease deed, restoring the suit for civil adjudication in line with the Supreme Court's SMS Tea Estate ruling.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration agreement unregistered lease deed inadequately stamped document Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC

Manav Dharma Trust v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Anr

01 Oct 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:5201-DB

The Delhi High Court held that failure to deposit compensation in court as required under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, results in the acquisition being deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, even if the person interested refuses compensation.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) of 2013 Act Land Acquisition Act 1894 compensation payment deposit in court

MANAV DHARMA TRUST v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

01 Oct 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:5202-DB

The Delhi High Court held that failure to deposit compensation in Court as required under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 means compensation is not deemed paid, resulting in lapse of acquisition under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

property appeal_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 compensation deemed paid possession

Commissioner of Income Tax-XII v. Indo Rub Industries

01 Oct 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; V. Kameswar Rao · 2014:DHC:5209-DB

The High Court upheld the ITAT order dismissing the Revenue's revision under Section 263, holding that the Assessing Officer had conducted necessary inquiries and missing documents alone do not justify setting aside an assessment order.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 263 Income Tax Act assessment order erroneous and prejudicial Assessing Officer inquiry

Suresh v. Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors.

01 Oct 2014 · Pratibha Rani · 2014:DHC:5177

The Delhi High Court upheld a two-year externment order against a habitual bootlegger, ruling that the authority's satisfaction based on sufficient material and procedural fairness was not vitiated.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant externment order Delhi Police Act Article 226 natural justice

Rajinder Kumar Arora v. Rajni Gupta

01 Oct 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5199

The Delhi High Court upheld a bonafide necessity eviction under the Delhi Rent Control Act, ruling that alternative residential premises cannot satisfy a commercial business need and that additional grounds filed beyond the statutory period for leave to defend are inadmissible.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 bonafide necessity eviction leave to defend alternative accommodation

M/S STRACON INDIA LTD v. PRASAR BHARTI

01 Oct 2014 · Deepa Sharma · 2014:DHC:5203

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award directing payment of Rs. 7.31 crores, holding that the claim was not barred by limitation and the award was not against public policy or jurisdictional limits.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitral award Section 34 Arbitration Act Limitation Public policy

ARAVALI POWER COMPANY PVT LTD v. M/S SUBHASH INFRA ENGINEERS LTD

01 Oct 2014 · Deepa Sharma · 2014:DHC:5205

The Delhi High Court held that the arbitrator's order releasing the final bill payment was an interim award not appealable, but the order releasing the bank guarantee was an interim order appealable and set aside for non-compliance with contractual conditions.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration interim award bank guarantee defect liability period

Pandit Munshi & Associates Ltd v. Union of India

01 Oct 2014 · Deepa Sharma · 2014:DHC:5204

The Delhi High Court held that an order terminating arbitral proceedings under Section 32(2)(c) is not an arbitral award and cannot be challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 32(2)(c) Termination of arbitral proceedings Arbitral award

Ramesh Gupta v. Rakesh Gupta

01 Oct 2014 · G. S. Sistani · 2014:DHC:5212

The Delhi High Court granted possession to the plaintiff based on admitted terms of a registered Will, rejecting the defendant's vague denial and family settlement claim, allowing decree under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 12 Rule 6 CPC Will Decree on admissions Family settlement

Salazar Luis Anthony Marques v. Mohd. Haroon Japanwala & Ors.

01 Oct 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:5211
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld eviction where the tenant's leave to defend application was rejected due to a fatal defect of non-attested affidavit, holding that actual knowledge of summons suffices as effective service and limitation was correctly computed considering court holidays.

property petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act Section 25B leave to defend affidavit attestation

Rajpal v. Prakash Devi & Ors.

01 Oct 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5191

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition under Article 227 challenging the condonation of a 25-day delay in bringing legal heirs on record, holding such orders non-appealable and the petition frivolous.

civil petition_dismissed Article 227 Constitution of India condonation of delay bringing legal heirs on record Order XXII Rule 3(1) CPC

M/S RATHI STEELS LTD. v. M/S SENBO ENGINEERING LTD.

01 Oct 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:5190

The Delhi High Court upheld that a contractual territorial jurisdiction clause confers exclusive jurisdiction to the specified courts even without explicit exclusivity wording, dismissing the petition challenging the trial court's order.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction exclusive jurisdiction clause purchase order Order XXXVII CPC