Delhi High Court

98,981 judgments

Year:

State v. Chaturbhuj Singh

31 May 2013 · Sanjiv Khanna; Siddharth Mridul · 2013:DHC:2931-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of a bank security guard who fatally shot a man attempting to escape after committing fraud, holding that the guard acted within his right to private defence and duty.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant right to private defence culpable homicide not amounting to murder security guard duty excessive force

Hillcrest Realty Sdn Bhd v. Hotel Queen Road Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

31 May 2013 · S. Muralidhar · 2013:DHC:2932
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Court held that Hotel Queens Road Pvt. Ltd. had become a public limited company in 2002, entitling Hillcrest Realty to voting rights on preference shares due to non-payment of dividends, and invalidated certain share allotments and transfers for non-compliance with statutory provisions, thereby allowing the appeal and directing corrective measures.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant Companies Act 1956 public limited company private limited company cumulative redeemable preference shares

Vidur Impex & Traders Pvt. Ltd. v. Pradeep Kumar Khanna & Ors.

31 May 2013 · P.K. Bhasin · 2013:DHC:2933

The Delhi High Court rejected the suit seeking declaration of title based on sale deeds held invalid by the Supreme Court for violating an injunction, holding the plaint lacked cause of action and was liable to be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC cause of action sale deed injunction

Vidur Impex & Traders Pvt. Ltd. v. Pradeep Kumar Khanna & Ors.

31 May 2013 · P.K. Bhasin · 2013:DHC:2934

The Delhi High Court rejected the plaintiffs' suit for declaration of title based on sale deeds held invalid by the Supreme Court, ruling no cause of action existed and upholding the binding effect of the Supreme Court's adverse findings.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC Sale deeds Specific performance Injunction

Vidur Impex & Traders Pvt. Ltd. v. Pradeep Kumar Khanna & Ors.

31 May 2013 · P.K. Bhasin · 2013:DHC:2935

The Delhi High Court rejected the plaintiffs' suit seeking declaration of title based on sale deeds held by the Supreme Court to be invalid due to violation of injunction, holding no cause of action existed.

civil plaint_rejected Significant sale deed injunction specific performance Order VII Rule 11 CPC

Vidur Impex & Traders Pvt. Ltd. v. Pradeep Kumar Khanna & Ors.

31 May 2013 · P.K. Bhasin · 2013:DHC:2936

The Delhi High Court rejected the plaintiffs' suit for declaration of title based on sale deeds held by the Supreme Court to be invalid due to violation of injunction, holding the plaint disclosed no cause of action.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC cause of action sale deed injunction

H.K. Bharti v. Union of India & Ors.

31 May 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:2937-DB

Disciplinary action for gross negligence in quasi-judicial tax assessment upheld despite absence of mala fide, emphasizing the need for due diligence in official decision-making.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant quasi-judicial functions disciplinary proceedings gross negligence dereliction of duty

Association of Unified Telecom Services v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited

31 May 2013 · Chief Justice; J. Jayant Nath · 2013:DHC:2938-DB

The Delhi High Court modified an interim stay on BSNL's port charge circulars, relaxing security conditions on private operators and directing lawful recovery of service tax, remanding the matter for final adjudication.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Telecom Regulatory Authority of India BSNL port charges interconnection agreements

Association of Unified Telecom Services v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited

31 May 2013 · Chief Justice; Jayant Nath, J. · 2013:DHC:2939-DB

The Delhi High Court modified an interim stay on BSNL's port charge circulars by relaxing onerous conditions on private operators and clarified BSNL's entitlement to recover service tax in accordance with law, remanding the matter for final adjudication.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Telecom Regulatory Authority of India port charges interconnection agreements bank guarantee

Association of Unified Telecom Services v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited

31 May 2013 · The Chief Justice; J. Jayant Nath · 2013:DHC:2924-DB

The Delhi High Court modified an interim stay on BSNL's port charge circulars by easing onerous conditions on private operators while affirming BSNL's right to recover dues with appropriate safeguards pending final adjudication.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Telecom Regulatory Authority of India BSNL port charges interconnection agreements

Association of Unified Telecom Services v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited

31 May 2013 · The Chief Justice; J. Jayant Nath · 2013:DHC:2923-DB

The Delhi High Court modified an interim stay on BSNL's port charge circulars, balancing security undertakings and lawful recovery of service tax, remanding the matter for final adjudication.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Telecom Regulatory Authority of India BSNL Port Charges Interconnection Agreements

Meena Premchandani v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

31 May 2013 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2013:DHC:2976
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that an Enquiry Officer under Rule 14(2) CCS (CCA) Rules need not be a public servant or employee, validating the appointment of an advocate as Enquiry Officer by Sindhi Academy.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Enquiry Officer Rule 14(2) CCS (CCA) Rules public servant authority

Nestle India Limited & Anr v. Union of India & Ors

31 May 2013 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Siddharth Mridul · 2013:DHC:2974-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that until alignment in 1997, manufacturers could comply with either the IMS Act or the PFA Act without penalty due to irreconcilable inconsistencies between the statutes.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Infant Milk Substitutes Act, 1992 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 labeling requirements statutory inconsistency

State v. Vinod Pandit

31 May 2013 · Kailash Gambhir · 2013:DHC:2971

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's finding that the accused was a juvenile at the time of the offence based on authentic school records, emphasizing the primacy of documentary evidence over medical tests in age determination under the Juvenile Justice Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant juvenile justice age determination school certificate ossification test

CICO TECHNOLOGIES LTD v. M/S SHRIRAM ENTERPRISES

31 May 2013 · Manmohan Singh · 2013:DHC:2970

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, holding that a valid arbitration agreement existed despite respondents' objections, and upheld interim relief during arbitration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator Distributorship Agreement valid arbitration clause

ISHVAKOO (INDIA) PVT LTD v. NATIONAL PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD

31 May 2013 · Manmohan Singh, J. · 2013:DHC:2969
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition to terminate the arbitrator's mandate and appointed an independent arbitrator to ensure expeditious resolution of a long-delayed arbitration dispute.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 14 Section 15 Section 11

P.L. Kalra v. Braham Dutt Saini

31 May 2013 · Manmohan Singh · 2013:DHC:2968

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition for appointment of an arbitrator due to non-compliance with mandatory notice requirements under the arbitration agreement, affirming the necessity of strict procedural adherence before invoking arbitration.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 petition Notice requirement Arbitration agreement

Kumar Nikhil @ Saroj Kumar Shukla @ Jhunnu v. State NCT of Delhi

31 May 2013 · R. V. Easwar · 2013:DHC:2967

Anticipatory bail was denied to the accused in a dowry harassment case due to continuing offence allegations, non-compliance with court orders, and risk of fleeing justice.

criminal appeal_dismissed anticipatory bail section 438 Cr.P.C. section 498A IPC dowry demand

HRD Corporation v. GAIL (India) Ltd

31 May 2013 · J. R. Midha · 2013:DHC:2965

The Delhi High Court held that the 1999 agreement to supply HDPE wax covers only the plant existing at that time and does not include wax produced at a new plant commissioned later, dismissing the petition for interim injunction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant interim injunction specific performance contract interpretation plant definition

N. K. Ghai v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

31 May 2013 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:2926-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld that promotions must strictly follow statutory Recruitment Regulations and administrative resolutions cannot amend or override such rules without prescribed statutory procedure.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Recruitment Regulations Promotion Assistant Education Officer Deputy Education Officer