Delhi High Court

101,979 judgments

Year:

Sikander Mirza and Ors. v. State & Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · Sunil Gaur · 2013:DHC:1245

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order framing charges against the petitioners for attempt to murder, poisoning, cruelty, and dowry offences, dismissing the revision petition for discharge at the charge framing stage.

criminal appeal_dismissed charge framing unexplained delay in FIR FSL report attempt to poison

Ritu Kaushal v. Directorate of Education & Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2013:DHC:1234

The Delhi High Court held that removal from an additional duty without substantive post or pay reduction does not amount to demotion or loss of rank, dismissing the teacher's petition challenging her removal as Primary Wing Coordinator.

labor petition_dismissed Significant Primary Wing Coordinator demotion loss of rank additional duty

State Trading Corporation of India Ltd v. State Bank of India & Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; Indermeet Kaur · 2013:DHC:1224-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld foreign arbitration awards and Swiss Court injunctions, dismissed the writ petition, and held the petitioner liable to repay amounts wrongfully obtained under a bank guarantee, emphasizing the binding nature of foreign judgments and the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

civil petition_dismissed Significant bank guarantee foreign award arbitration Swiss Court injunction

Shambhu Nath Das and Ors. v. Director of Education and Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2013:DHC:1232

The Delhi High Court directed payment of Sixth Pay Commission arrears with interest to school employees, rejecting delay due to change in Managing Committee.

labor petition_allowed Significant Sixth Pay Commission monetary benefits arrears writ petition

Ram Sarup @ Nathan Ram v. Kokila Devi & Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · V.K. Shali · 2013:DHC:1233

The Delhi High Court dismissed a regular second appeal in a possession suit, holding that disputed ownership and municipal records raised questions of fact, not substantial questions of law.

civil appeal_dismissed regular second appeal substantial question of law possession suit ownership proof

Bijoy Kumar Bazaz v. M/S Yamaha Motor Pvt. Ltd.

06 Mar 2013 · Manmohan Singh · 2013:DHC:1227

The Delhi High Court held that delay of 225 days in re-filing objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act cannot be condoned as the statutory limitation period is mandatory and unextendible.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 condonation of delay limitation period

Food Corporation of India v. Guru Ram Das Rice & Oil Mills and Partners & Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · Manmohan Singh · 2013:DHC:1226

The Delhi High Court held that delay in re-filing objections to an arbitral award beyond the statutory limitation under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot be condoned, dismissing the petition for delay caused by negligence.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 condonation of delay limitation period

CIT v. Sadhna Gupta

06 Mar 2013 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; R.V. Easwar · 2013:DHC:1225-DB
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that additions under section 69B cannot be based solely on the DVO’s valuation report without independent evidence of extra consideration, dismissing the Revenue’s appeal.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 69B Section 142A District Valuation Officer

Ravinder Kumar v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

06 Mar 2013 · S. P. Garg · 2013:DHC:1210

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Ravinder Kumar for kidnapping and raping a minor girl below 16 years, ruling that her consent was immaterial, but reduced his sentence from seven to five years' imprisonment.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant kidnapping rape minor consent immaterial

Ram Gopal v. State (NCT, Delhi)

06 Mar 2013 · S.P. Garg · 2013:DHC:1211

The Delhi High Court set aside the conviction of Ram Gopal under Sections 397/34 IPC due to inconsistent prosecution evidence and procedural defects in investigation, granting him benefit of doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 397 IPC dacoity benefit of doubt investigation irregularities

Ravendra Garg v. Union of India and Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2013:DHC:1239

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the retirement age policy for Board level appointments on grounds of estoppel and infructuousness after the petitioner participated in a subsequent selection process accepting the age limit.

administrative appeal_dismissed writ petition mandamus certiorari retirement age

Jagjit Singh v. Punjab National Bank

06 Mar 2013 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2013:DHC:1241

The Delhi High Court upheld the removal of a bank officer for sanctioning loans without security, ruling that non-payment or restricted withdrawal of subsistence allowance does not vitiate departmental enquiry absent shown prejudice, and acquittal in criminal case does not automatically discharge departmental charges.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant subsistence allowance departmental enquiry natural justice acquittal in criminal case

Arun Kumar Singh v. State of NCT Delhi & Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · V. K. Shali · 2013:DHC:1242

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against an ex parte arbitral award, holding that the appellant was duly served and failed to prove forgery or violation of natural justice.

civil appeal_dismissed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ex parte arbitral award natural justice service of notice

M.F. Khan v. B.H.E.L & Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2013:DHC:1240

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition holding that a fabricated promotion order lacking procedural compliance is invalid and its cancellation lawful, rejecting the petitioner’s claim to the supervisory post.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant promotion order Departmental Promotion Committee fraudulent document natural justice

NAGALAND INDUSTRIAL RAW MATERIALS & SUPPLY CORPORATION LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

06 Mar 2013 · Manmohan Singh · 2013:DHC:1228

The Delhi High Court held that delay in re-filing objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 beyond the prescribed period cannot be condoned, resulting in dismissal of the petition as time-barred.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 condonation of delay limitation period

Madan Singh & Anr. v. Vee Pee International Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · G. P. Mittal · 2013:DHC:1229

The Delhi High Court quashed a Section 138 NI Act complaint against petitioners wrongly prosecuted as partners of a proprietorship firm, holding that inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC permits quashing when unimpeachable evidence disproves allegations.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 482 CrPC quashing of complaint proprietorship vs partnership

Yogender Pratap Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

06 Mar 2013 · G. P. Mittal · 2013:DHC:1230

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against acquittal in a poisoning case due to contradictions and suspicious conduct in the prosecution's evidence, affirming that benefit of doubt must be given where the case is not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 328 IPC poisoning benefit of doubt acquittal

Saket Aggarwal v. Directorate of Revenue

06 Mar 2013 · G. P. Mittal · 2013:DHC:1235

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 174 and 175 IPC for non-compliance of summons issued by an officer not duly empowered at the time, holding retrospective empowerment cannot create offences violating Article 20 of the Constitution.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 108 Customs Act Section 174 IPC Section 175 IPC Section 482 CrPC

Om Prakash Khanna v. Ved Prakash Sharma & Anr.

06 Mar 2013 · Veena Birbal · 2013:DHC:1231

The court upheld the trial court’s order refusing to delete the petitioner’s name from the suit array, holding that a party who assumes responsibility by affidavit is a proper party to the suit.

civil appeal_dismissed Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC Section 151 CPC deletion of party proper party

Major General Shyam Shrivastava v. Union of India

06 Mar 2013 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A.K. Pathak · 2013:DHC:1237-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the army’s interim administrative actions attaching the petitioner pending inquiry, directing final decision on the Show Cause Notice within a stipulated time, and refused to quash the impugned orders.

administrative petition_dismissed Army HQ Signal attachment Court of Inquiry Show Cause Notice