Delhi High Court

96,004 judgments

Year:

Golu @ Pankaj @ Sanjay v. State

02 Feb 2012 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:4798-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the murder conviction of the appellant due to inconsistencies in dying declarations and identification, granting him the benefit of doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant dying declaration benefit of doubt identification murder

Govt of NCT of Delhi v. Vishambar Dayal

31 Jan 2012 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025 SCC OnLine Del
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's order reinstating a police constable dismissed for submitting a false caste certificate, holding that departmental proceedings are barred after criminal acquittal unless specific exceptions under Rule 12 of the Delhi Police Rules apply.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Police Rules Rule 12 DPPAR criminal acquittal departmental proceedings

Raj Kumar v. Vetsus

06 Jan 2012 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:7262-DB

The Delhi High Court remanded seniority disputes to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the need to implead necessary parties and follow Supreme Court precedent on reckoning seniority from ad-hoc promotion dates.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant seniority list Original Application non-impleadment past wrong as precedent

Vanshika v. University of Delhi & Anr.

03 Jan 2012 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:1236
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court held that a student eligible but unable to appear in first semester exams due to fee payment failure must be allowed to continue studies and appear in subsequent exams when permitted by university authorities.

administrative petition_allowed Significant university admission eligibility vs entitlement examination candidature estoppel

Directorate General, Border Security Force v. NIIT Technologies Limited

31 Dec 2011 · Navin Chawla · 2019:DHC:7252
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award interpreting a turnkey contract's delivery timeline as a single completion date, rejecting liquidated damages for intermediate delays and emphasizing limited judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 turnkey contract liquidated damages

Ajay Malhotra & Anr. v. State Govt of Delhi

13 Dec 2011 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:4358-DB

The Delhi High Court modified the murder conviction of Ajay Malhotra to culpable homicide not amounting to murder and acquitted Rahul Kohli, holding that no unlawful assembly with common object to commit murder was proved.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant unlawful assembly common object Section 149 IPC culpable homicide

PRADEEP v. STATE

07 Dec 2011 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:5094-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence of a husband for murdering his wife in their matrimonial home, emphasizing the obligation on the husband to explain the death when present at the crime scene.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant murder matrimonial home adverse inference resiling witnesses

Cannes Property Management Services Private Limited v. Allahabad Bank

01 Dec 2011 · Sanjeev Narula · 2021:DHC:3230
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a bank purchasing property under SARFAESI proceedings is not bound by an arbitration agreement in a separate maintenance contract executed by the previous owner absent clear assignment or consent.

civil petition_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement non-signatory succession in interest SARFAESI Act

Harish Bodh & Anr v. Kotak Mahindra Bank & Anr

22 Nov 2011 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:3801

The Delhi High Court held that applications under Order XXI Rule 90 CPC to set aside execution sale on grounds of fraud or irregularity must be filed within 60 days as per Article 127 of the Limitation Act, and Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to condone delay in such applications.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXI Rule 90 CPC Limitation Act 1963 Section 5 Limitation Act Article 127 Limitation Act

MMTC Limited v. Transammonia AG Zurich

14 Nov 2011 · S. Muralidhar · 2015:DHC:2393

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award holding that the seller complied with contractual shipment obligations by delivering 42,000 MTs on time, entitling the buyer to pay for accepted goods despite non-delivery of the full contracted quantity.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Sale of Goods Act, 1930 draft survey report contractual delivery

DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD v. SH JASPREET DHINGRA

14 Nov 2011 · C. HARI SHANKAR; AJAY DIGPAUL · 2025:DHC:1086-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that deleting a question with a typographical error and denying marks to candidates who correctly answered it was unjust, directing the awarding of marks to avoid prejudice.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Limited Departmental Competitive Examination typographical error question deletion awarding marks

Mohd. Tanvir v. State

03 Nov 2011 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:5789-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the life imprisonment convictions of two appellants for the murder of a child, relying on cumulative forensic, medical, and circumstantial evidence despite some procedural irregularities.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant murder Section 302 IPC DNA evidence forensic report

Mohd. Tanvir v. State

03 Nov 2011 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2014:DHC:5790-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence of appellants for the murder of a child based on strong circumstantial and forensic evidence despite challenges to witness credibility and procedural aspects.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant murder circumstantial evidence DNA evidence forensic science laboratory

EXHIBITIONS PVT. LTD. v. BUSWORLD INTERNATIONAL CVBA

25 Oct 2011 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7196

The Delhi High Court held that patent illegality is not a ground to challenge an international commercial arbitral award and directed deposit of the awarded amount under Claim II to maintain stay, while reserving jurisdictional issues on Claim I for further consideration.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant international commercial arbitration Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 patent illegality arbitrability

The University of Delhi v. Pratap Singh Bisht

11 Oct 2011 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:5558-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the University of Delhi's appointment of Shambhu Sharan Mishra by affirming the expert committee's discretion to relax eligibility criteria for PWD candidates and limiting judicial interference to cases of gross illegality.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant appointment relaxation of eligibility criteria PWD candidates expert selection committee

The University of Delhi v. Pratap Singh Bisht

11 Oct 2011 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2015:DHC:5557-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the appointment of Shambhu Sharan Mishra as Assistant Director, ruling that relaxation of eligibility criteria for PWD candidates by an expert committee is permissible and not liable to judicial interference absent gross illegality.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant appointment eligibility criteria relaxation PWD candidates

Karan Singh Kardam v. The Chambers Allotment Committee & Ors.

27 Sep 2011 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:5267-DB

The court held that seniority for chamber allotment must be based on Bar Association membership date, but existing allotments cannot be disturbed, directing a separate seniority list for future allotments.

civil appeal_allowed Significant seniority list chamber allotment District Court Karkardooma Bar Association membership

M/S GCG TRANSGLOBAL HOUSING PROJECT PVT LTD v. SURAKSHIT EXPORTS PRIVATE LTD & ORS

21 Sep 2011 · Jayant Nath · 2015:DHC:1367
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiff's amendment to add a redemption of mortgage relief, holding that such amendment did not fundamentally change the nature of the suit and was necessary for effective adjudication.

civil appeal_allowed Significant amendment of plaint Order 6 Rule 17 CPC change of nature of suit redemption of mortgage

Babita Goyal v. Bhasin Infotech and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

10 Sep 2011 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5765
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that disputes under an arbitration agreement must be referred to arbitration if the Section 11(6) petition is filed within three years of the arbitration notice, without examining limitation or merits at this stage.

civil petition_allowed Significant Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act arbitration notice limitation reference to arbitration

Luminous Power Technology Pvt Ltd v. Vinay Aggarwal

05 Sep 2011 · Vipin Sanghi · 2015:DHC:1022

The Delhi High Court dismissed the leave petition challenging acquittal in a cheque dishonour case, holding that the cheque amount exceeded the debt and the defence of misuse of blank cheque was probable, thus no interference was warranted.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Cheque dishonour Blank cheque misuse Appeal against acquittal