Delhi High Court

98,981 judgments

Year:

Union of India & Ors. v. Vijender Singh

02 Dec 2011 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:2495-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of a penalty imposed for lack of supervision, emphasizing the need to prove specific supervisory duties and adherence to scientific testing standards.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant lack of supervision disciplinary proceedings supervisory liability expert opinion

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

DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD v. PUNISH & ORS.

16 Nov 2011 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2013:DHC:7736-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision requiring the DSSSB to rank candidates with equal marks by date of birth and maintain extended select lists to fill vacancies, ensuring fair appointment processes respecting reservation norms.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant competitive examination reservation date of birth ranking select list

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

Paramjit Singh v. IOCL

31 Aug 2011 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2017:DHC:4058

The Delhi High Court held that minimum qualifying marks fixed before recruitment commencement and applied transparently do not invalidate selection even if not mentioned in the advertisement, dismissing the petition challenging IOCL's selection process.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant minimum qualifying marks recruitment process interview cut-off selection criteria

Union of India & Anr. v. Suresh Chandra

30 Aug 2011 · Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao · 2013:DHC:4348-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the sealed cover procedure for withholding promotion applies only after a charge sheet is filed in a criminal court, and upheld the department's decision to withhold promotion of an employee against whom prosecution was pending.

service_law appeal_allowed Significant sealed cover procedure promotion charge sheet disciplinary proceedings

Tej Narain @ Narain v. State

29 Aug 2011 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:7085

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for kidnapping and rape of a minor girl, emphasizing the credibility of her testimony corroborated by medical and forensic evidence and the immateriality of consent due to her age.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant sexual assault minor victim rape kidnapping

Tej Narain @ Narain v. State

29 Aug 2011 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:7081
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for kidnapping and rape of a minor girl, affirming that credible child testimony corroborated by medical and forensic evidence suffices for conviction even without a birth certificate.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant sexual assault minor victim rape kidnapping

Tej Narain @ Narain v. State

29 Aug 2011 · Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:7080

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of appellants for kidnapping and repeatedly raping a minor girl, relying on credible child testimony corroborated by medical and forensic evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant child sexual abuse rape of minor kidnapping Section 376(2)(f) IPC