Delhi High Court
92,628 judgments
Kanta Batra & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Employees who opted to continue under the CPF Scheme before the prescribed cut-off date cannot switch to the Pension Scheme later, and unauthorized extensions granted by the University are invalid.
Kanta Batra & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that employees who opted to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date cannot switch to the Pension Scheme thereafter, as extensions granted without proper approval are unauthorized and do not confer rights.
Kanta Batra & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that employees who opted to continue under the CPF Scheme before the prescribed cut-off date cannot switch over to the Pension Scheme later, and unauthorized extensions granted without government approval are invalid.
Kanta Batra & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that employees who opted to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date cannot switch to the Pension Scheme thereafter, as extensions granted without requisite approvals are invalid.
Kanta Batra & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that employees who opted to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date cannot switch over to the Pension Scheme thereafter, and unauthorized extensions granted without requisite approvals are invalid.
Kanta Batra & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that employees who opted to continue under the CPF Scheme by the prescribed cut-off date cannot switch over to the Pension Scheme later, as extensions granted without proper approval are invalid and do not confer rights.
R.N. Virmani v. University of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that employees who did not opt to continue under CPF by 30.09.1987 are deemed to have switched to the Pension Scheme automatically under the 1987 O.M., allowing their claims despite delay.
R.N. Virmani v. University of Delhi
Employees who failed to exercise option by 30.09.1987 to continue under CPF Scheme are deemed to have switched to the Pension Scheme by operation of law, entitling them to pension benefits.
R.N. Virmani v. University of Delhi
Employees who failed to exercise option to continue under CPF by 30.09.1987 are deemed to have switched to the Pension Scheme by legal fiction and are entitled to pension benefits.
R.N. Virmani v. University of Delhi
Employees who failed to exercise option to continue CPF by 30.09.1987 are deemed to have switched to the Pension Scheme under the 1987 Government O.M., entitling them to pension benefits despite delay.
MAG FILTERS EQUIPMENTS PVT LTD v. ERA BUILSYS LTD
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging an arbitral award on limitation grounds, holding that the limitation period commenced upon fulfillment of contractual conditions, not invoice dates.
Mohd. Arif v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court acquitted two appellants for lack of identification and evidence, while convicting one for criminal trespass and causing hurt with a deadly weapon, clarifying standards for conviction under Sections 307, 324, and 452 IPC.
Mohd. Arif v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court acquitted two appellants for lack of corroborative identification evidence and convicted one appellant under Sections 452 and 324 IPC, emphasizing the need for corroboration in first-time trial identification and distinguishing simple injuries from attempt to murder.
Mohd. Arif v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court acquitted two appellants for lack of identification and convicted one appellant for criminal trespass and causing hurt with a deadly weapon, emphasizing the need for corroboration in first-time identification cases and consistency of injury with charges.
IFCI LIMITED v. OM SHIVAY REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED
The Delhi High Court held that the limitation period for challenging a SARFAESI Act auction sale starts from the date of knowledge of the sale, and dismissed the writ petition for condonation of delay as barred by limitation.
Shiv Kumar v. State (NCT) of Delhi
The Delhi High Court converted the appellant's conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC, upheld conviction under Section 201 IPC, and directed concurrent sentences with release on sentence already undergone.
Shiv Kumar @ Pappi v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court upheld the life convictions of two appellants for the premeditated murder of Mukesh Gupta based on eyewitness and circumstantial evidence establishing common intention.
Jamir Ahmed @ Jamiruddin v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for murder based on credible ocular and medical evidence despite minor discrepancies and absence of independent witnesses.
Shivender Pandey @ Pandit & Ors. v. State
The Delhi High Court set aside convictions under Section 308/34 IPC due to inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence, granting benefit of doubt to the accused and ordering their acquittal.
Virender Kumar @ Kala v. State
The Delhi High Court allowed the criminal appeal of Virender Kumar @ Kala in terms of a detailed common judgment delivered in a related case.