Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Union of India & Anr. v. B.P. Gairola & Ors.

04 Aug 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vipin Sanghi · 2014:DHC:3672-DB
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside the Tribunal’s order granting retrospective promotion to a retired employee, holding that such promotion is impermissible without explicit rule support or proof of malafide.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant retrospective promotion notional promotion Departmental Promotion Committee office memorandum 12.10.1998

Travelite (India) v. UOI and Ors.

04 Aug 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vibhu Bakhru · 2014:DHC:3659-DB

The Delhi High Court struck down Rule 5A(2) of the Service Tax Rules and related CBEC instructions as ultra vires the Finance Act, holding that only special audits under Section 72A are permissible and general audits on demand are unauthorized.

tax petition_allowed Significant Service Tax Rules 1994 Rule 5A(2) Finance Act 1994 Section 72A

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI v. SH. RAKESH BENIWAL

04 Aug 2014 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; VIPIN SANGHI · 2014:DHC:3658-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing retrospective promotion and payment of arrears to employees whose appointment was delayed due to administrative lapses, emphasizing that qualifying service requirements can be relaxed to prevent injustice.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant promotion seniority qualifying service administrative delay

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II v. Jubilant Foodwork Pvt. Ltd.

01 Aug 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; V. Kameswar Rao · 2014:DHC:3643-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that franchise fees paid for trademark use and advertisement expenses are revenue expenditures and dismissed the Revenue's appeal to treat part of them as capital expenditure.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant franchise fee revenue expenditure capital expenditure advertisement expenses

Naresh Gupta v. Rajinder Kumar

01 Aug 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:3646

The Delhi High Court dismissed the tenant's petition challenging eviction on bonafide necessity grounds, affirming landlord's ownership and bona fide need, and upholding the strict procedural timelines for leave to defend applications.

property petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 bonafide necessity eviction petition leave to defend

Sh. Chandra Bose v. Lt. Governor NCT of Delhi and Anr.

01 Aug 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; V. Kameswar Rao · 2014:DHC:3632-DB

The Delhi High Court held that confirmation in Delhi Higher Judicial Service requires a formal order and notification, rejecting the petitioner's claim of deemed confirmation after probation and upholding his reversion due to non-confirmation.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant deemed confirmation probation extension Delhi Higher Judicial Service Rules confirmation procedure

Anita v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

01 Aug 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vipin Sanghi · 2014:DHC:3629-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the MCD's recruitment rules denying 5% relaxation in minimum qualifying marks to OBC candidates for Teacher (Primary) posts, affirming the employer's prerogative to set qualifications and distinguishing OBC from SC/ST for reservation benefits.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant OBC relaxation recruitment rules Teacher Primary post Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Gyan Singh v. Durga Pratap Singh

01 Aug 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:3644

The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the dismissal of an application to set aside an ex parte decree under Order 37 Rule 4 CPC, holding that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie defense or credible grounds for relief.

civil appeal_dismissed Order 37 Rule 4 CPC ex parte decree leave to defend Section 115 CPC

Rajender Prasad v. Chairman-cum-MD Delhi Transport Corporation

01 Aug 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vipin Sanghi · 2014:DHC:3639-DB

The Delhi High Court held that full salary during suspension is payable only if suspension is wholly unjustified, and upheld denial of full pay where the petitioner was detained and faced criminal trial before acquittal.

service_law petition_dismissed Significant suspension full salary during suspension Fundamental Rule 54-B prevention of corruption

Ramesh Kumar v. Neelam Dawar

01 Aug 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:3630
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld an eviction order under the Delhi Rent Control Act, ruling that bona fide need and landlord status need not be established by absolute ownership, and tenants cannot challenge probate court decisions in eviction proceedings.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act Section 14(1)(e) Section 25B bona fide need

Roopa R. Joshi v. UOI and Ors.

01 Aug 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Vipin Sanghi · 2014:DHC:3628-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a senior government officer for prolonged unauthorized absence and traveling abroad without permission, holding the penalty proportionate and justified.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant unauthorized absence disciplinary proceedings government servant misconduct leave extension

Rajeev Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

01 Aug 2014 · Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:3631-DB

The Delhi High Court refused mid-session admissions to fill vacant IIT seats, directing systemic reforms for common counselling and policy review on reserved seats and lateral entry for future academic years.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant vacant seats Joint Entrance Examination Indian Institutes of Technology common counselling

Master Sahib Singh Riat v. Director of Education & Ors.

01 Aug 2014 · Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:3624-DB

The Delhi High Court directed issuance of a Transfer Certificate to a minor student despite parental disputes and fee arrears, emphasizing the child's educational welfare under Article 226.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Transfer Certificate minor student parental dispute custody

M/S Dhanraj Bajaj & Company v. Navodaya Vidayala Samiti

01 Aug 2014 · Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:3623-DB

The Delhi High Court held that correction or modification of an Arbitral Award cannot be sought through writ jurisdiction and dismissed the appellant's claim to impose liability on a non-party, affirming the dismissal of the writ petition and costs imposed for frivolous litigation.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award Article 226 Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34

Apoorv Yadav v. University of Delhi & Ors.

01 Aug 2014 · Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw; G. Rohini · 2014:DHC:3627-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the University of Delhi's aggregate attendance requirement is not inconsistent with the Bar Council of India's subject-wise attendance rule, dismissing the appeal of a student barred from examinations for shortage of aggregate attendance.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant attendance requirement Bar Council of India rules University of Delhi legal education standards

Sumitra Parashar & Anr. v. Raj Rani & Anr.

01 Aug 2014 · The Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:3626-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition and held that additional relief claimed by amendment of the plaint is not barred by limitation at the amendment stage, and limitation can be pleaded in the written statement.

civil petition_dismissed amendment of plaint limitation review petition additional relief

LRSD Global Holding Private Limited v. Rajasthan Global Securities Limited

01 Aug 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:3638

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between LRSD Global Holdings Pvt. Ltd. and Rajasthan Global Securities Ltd., holding the share exchange ratio fair and the scheme not prejudicial to stakeholders under the Companies Act, 1956.

corporate petition_allowed Significant Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 share exchange ratio valuation

Karan Singh Saini v. Baljeet Singh LRs

01 Aug 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:3633

The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the trial court's order allowing legal heirs of a deceased defendant to be brought on record, holding that such procedural orders are not ordinarily interfered with under Article 227.

civil appeal_dismissed Article 227 Constitution of India Order 22 Rule 4 CPC Section 5 Limitation Act legal heirs

Ankur Raheja v. Sada Ram Kadian

01 Aug 2014 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2014:DHC:3635

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the trial court's refusal to set aside an ex parte order, holding that insufficient evidence was provided to justify non-appearance and that the High Court's extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 was not warranted.

civil appeal_dismissed Article 227 Constitution of India Order 9 Rule 7 CPC ex parte order setting aside ex parte decree

Mandeep Singh v. State

01 Aug 2014 · Sanjiv Khanna; G.P. Mittal · 2014:DHC:3634-DB