Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Rajendra Singh Rathore v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation

28 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2872

The Delhi High Court set aside an ex parte decree for liquidated damages under Order XXXVII CPC, holding the stipulated sum was a penalty, summons service was valid, and granted conditional leave to defend.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XXXVII CPC summary suit liquidated damages penalty

Sheikh Shah Alam v. Kabul Singh

28 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2899

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of a tenant under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, rejecting the tenant's application for leave to defend due to lack of triable issues and bona fide requirement established by the landlord.

property appeal_dismissed eviction Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) leave to defend

M/S VALUE SOURCE MERCANTILE LTD. v. M/S SPAN MECHNOTRONIX LTD.

28 May 2014 · THE CHIEF JUSTICE; RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW · 2014:DHC:2870-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the power of courts under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act to direct payment of rent arrears during arbitration, rejecting the appellant’s partial lease termination claim and dismissing the appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration Act interim measures lease agreement composite lease

Sat Narayan v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

28 May 2014 · Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J · 2014:DHC:2869-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a licensee of a government kiosk has no perpetual right to occupy the premises and the license can be terminated lawfully without obligation to rehabilitate, even if the licensee is physically handicapped.

property appeal_dismissed licensee rights government kiosk termination of license physical handicap

Abhinav Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. v. Uppal Engineering Company Pvt Ltd

28 May 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:2891

The Delhi High Court upheld the binding nature of a mediation settlement and pierced the corporate veil to prevent judgment debtor's attempt to defeat execution by transferring property to a related company.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant mediation settlement execution petition arbitral award enforcement lifting corporate veil

Idiscoveri Education Pvt Ltd v. Youreka Outbound Services Pvt Ltd

28 May 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:2898

The Delhi High Court approved the Scheme of Amalgamation between two companies and dispensed with convening stakeholder meetings based on unanimous written consents under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956.

corporate appeal_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391 to 394 dispensing meetings

Manoj Pawar v. Union of India & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Reva Khetrapal; Pratibha Rani · 2014:DHC:2858-DB

The Delhi High Court held that pay fixation under the 6th Central Pay Commission cannot be revised to an employee’s detriment without issuing a show cause notice and opportunity of hearing, and recovery of excess salary paid without fraud is impermissible.

service_law petition_allowed Significant pay fixation 6th Central Pay Commission show cause notice recovery of salary

Ankur Chhibber v. Union of India & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Reva Khetrapal; Pratibha Rani · 2014:DHC:2859-DB

The Delhi High Court held that government pay cannot be reduced or recovered without issuing a show cause notice and opportunity of hearing, quashing arbitrary pay revision and recovery orders against a CRPF Head Constable.

administrative petition_allowed Significant pay fixation Central Pay Commission show cause notice recovery of excess payment

GC Ketan Bhateja v. Union of India & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Reva Khetrapal; Pratibha Rani · 2014:DHC:2860-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging medical disqualification due to Thalassemia Trait, holding that it will not substitute its opinion for the expert Medical Board in military recruitment fitness matters.

administrative petition_dismissed Thalassemia Trait Medical fitness Officers’ Training Academy Army Act Sections 26 and 27

Jagjit Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2861-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the old Act lapse under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if an award was made over five years ago but possession or compensation remains pending, regardless of interim court orders.

property petition_allowed Significant Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 24(2) Deeming provision

Suresh Kumar v. UOI & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Jayant Nath · 2014:DHC:2826-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the dismissal of a CISF constable due to procedural irregularities and unreliable evidence in the departmental inquiry, ordering reinstatement with partial back wages.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant departmental inquiry natural justice charge memorandum amendment disciplinary proceedings

Jagjit Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2868-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the old Act lapse under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if an award was made over five years ago but possession or compensation has not been effected, regardless of interim court orders.

property petition_allowed Significant Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 24(2) Deeming provision

Jagjit Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2862-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the old Act lapse under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if an award was made over five years ago but possession or compensation remain unpaid, regardless of interim court orders.

property petition_allowed Significant Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 24(2) Deeming provision

Jagjit Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2866-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the old Act lapse under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if an award was made over five years ago but possession or compensation remains unpaid, regardless of interim court orders.

property petition_allowed Significant Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 24(2) Deeming provision

Jagjit Singh v. Union of India

27 May 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2867-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the old Act lapse under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if an award was made over five years ago but possession or compensation remains pending, regardless of interim court orders.

property petition_allowed Significant land acquisition Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 section 24(2) legal fiction

Jagjit Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2864-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the old Act lapse under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if an award was made over five years ago but possession or compensation remains pending, regardless of interim court orders.

property petition_allowed Significant Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 24(2) Deeming provision

Jagjit Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2014:DHC:2863-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the old Act lapse under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if an award was made five or more years prior to the new Act but possession or compensation remains incomplete, regardless of interim court orders.

property petition_allowed Significant Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 24(2) legal fiction

Pradeep Kumar v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

27 May 2014 · S.P. Garg · 2014:DHC:2829

The Delhi High Court upheld the appellant’s conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC based on credible eyewitness and medical evidence, but reduced the sentence considering mitigating factors and compensation offered.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 304 Part-II IPC culpable homicide eyewitness testimony delay in FIR

Centre for Human Rights v. Union of India

27 May 2014 · Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:2828-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking directions to improve a children's hospital, holding that judicial intervention requires sufficient factual basis and that health policy matters are primarily governmental prerogatives.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Public Interest Litigation Right to Health Article 21 Judicial Restraint

Apoorv Yadav v. University of Delhi & Ors.

27 May 2014 · Manmohan J · 2014:DHC:2827

The Delhi High Court upheld the University of Delhi's aggregate attendance requirement for LL.B. students, ruling that both 70% subject-wise and 66% aggregate attendance are necessary to appear in exams and be promoted.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant attendance requirement Bar Council of India Rules of Legal Education 2008 University of Delhi attendance rules promotion to next semester