Delhi High Court
92,628 judgments
Steel Authority of India Ltd v. Dampskibselskabet Norden A/S
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award holding that a vessel's Notice of Readiness at discharge ports is valid despite crane breakdowns, and laytime commences accordingly under the Contract of Affreightment.
Anand Kumar v. State of Delhi (NCT)
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for attempted robbery while armed with a functional country made pistol, affirming that credible evidence of intimidation and possession of a deadly weapon suffices despite investigative lapses.
Deepak Sharma & Anr. v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld convictions under Section 307/34 IPC relying on the credible testimony of the injured witness despite investigative lapses and delayed identification of accused in court.
State v. Surender Singh & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the death sentence of three accused for the premeditated murder of Urmila Devi based on circumstantial evidence, corroborated statements, and failure to explain incriminating circumstances.
Yogesh Kumar @ Bunty v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction for murder based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence despite defective investigation and contradictory defense explanations.
Metal Forging Pvt. Ltd. v. DDA
The Delhi High Court held that DDA cannot demand further composition fee or re-enter the leased plot for non-construction when delay is due to DDA's failure to amend the layout plan, upholding the appellant's exemption under a 1979 letter.
Sharda Sharma & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking continuation of service beyond 55 years for GKK workers, holding that without absorption in Government departments or PSUs, termination at 55 years as per Supreme Court orders is lawful.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to exercise option to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, invalidated extensions beyond the cut-off date, and denied relief to those who accepted CPF benefits without protest.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to exercise the option to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date are automatically covered by the Pension Scheme, invalidated unauthorized extensions, and denied relief to those who accepted CPF benefits without protest.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to exercise option to continue under CPF Scheme by the cut-off date are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, invalidated extensions beyond the cut-off date, and allowed relief except where CPF benefits were accepted without protest.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to exercise the option to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, invalidated extensions beyond the cut-off date, and denied relief to those who accepted CPF benefits without protest.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to exercise the option to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, but relief is available to those who exercised the option post cut-off date and did not accept CPF benefits without protest.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to exercise a valid option by the prescribed cut-off date are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, and relief is barred by delay if CPF benefits were accepted without protest.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to opt for the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, but those who exercised the option during invalid extensions and did not accept CPF benefits without protest are entitled to relief.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to opt for the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, invalidated extensions beyond the cut-off date, and allowed relief to petitioners who did not accept CPF benefits without protest.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
Employees who failed to exercise a timely option to continue under the CPF Scheme are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, and acceptance of CPF benefits without protest bars conversion claims, while delay does not bar relief where the cause of action is continuing.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to exercise the option to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, and relief is barred by delay where CPF benefits were accepted without protest.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to exercise option to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date are deemed covered under the Pension Scheme, invalidated extensions beyond the cut-off date, and denied relief to those who accepted CPF benefits without protest.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that employees who opted to continue under the CPF Scheme after the 1987 cut-off date are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, disallowing relief to those who accepted CPF benefits without protest.
N. C. Bakshi v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that employees who failed to exercise the option to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date are deemed covered by the Pension Scheme, invalidated extensions beyond the cut-off, and denied relief to those who accepted CPF benefits without protest.