Delhi High Court
105,237 judgments
Rakesh Kumar Bhagat & Ors. v. Guru Harkishan Public School & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that recognized private unaided minority schools are statutorily bound under Section 10(1) of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 to implement 6th and 7th Pay Commission recommendations and pay arrears to their employees, rejecting claims of exemption based on minority status or financial constraints.
Sadiq Hussain v. Geer Aar Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd.
The petition filed by Sadiq Hussain was disposed of by the Delhi High Court by referring to the judgment in a related case on the same day.
Yog Raj Chopra v. S.C. Chopra
The High Court of Delhi dismissed two appeals filed by Yog Raj Chopra as withdrawn upon the appellant's counsel's request.
Kumar Goyal v. Advanced Medical Optics P. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be filed in courts having jurisdiction over the place of cheque dishonour and quashed complaints filed in Delhi for lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Swastik Sales Corporation & Ors. v. Advanced Medical Optics I P. Ltd.
Delhi High Court held that criminal complaints under Section 138 NI Act must be tried by courts where the cheque is dishonoured, quashing complaints filed in Delhi for lack of territorial jurisdiction.
The National Trust, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment v. Alegion Insurance Broking Limited
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, holding no real dispute existed between the parties as accounts were settled and partial payments accepted.
M/S AF COLENCO LTD. v. M/S TUFF ENERGY LTD.
The Delhi High Court decreed a suit for recovery of unpaid consultancy fees against a defendant who failed to appear despite proper and substituted service, awarding interest and costs to the plaintiff.
Rattan Singh v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Section 20 NDPS Act but reduced the default sentence for non-payment of fine considering the appellant's prolonged incarceration and poverty.
Vinod Kumar v. State
The Delhi High Court set aside the conviction for kidnapping and rape, holding that the prosecutrix was above sixteen years and had accompanied the appellant voluntarily, negating the prosecution's case.
Vijaya C. Gursahaney v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that the period of litigation delaying mutation must be excluded from composition fee calculation, directing the DDA to recalculate the fee accordingly.
Tara Chand v. State
The criminal appeal of Tara Chand was disposed of by referring to a common detailed judgment delivered in a related appeal on the same day.
Jai Bhagwan & Ors. v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation
The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation for daily wager employees illegally retrenched without statutory benefits, declining reinstatement due to elapsed time and nature of employment.
DDA v. Banwari Lal Arya
The Delhi High Court held that cancellation of a flat allotment without sending the demand letter to the applicant's permanent address after postal communication failed is invalid, and reinstated the allotment subject to payment of current costs.
Dharambir Singh v. UOI & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a BSF constable for assaulting a superior officer, holding that the disciplinary process complied with natural justice and the penalty was not disproportionate.
S.K. Sharma v. School of Planning and Architecture
The Delhi High Court upheld the termination of a probationary employee by a delegated authority through a non-stigmatic order without requiring a formal departmental enquiry, rejecting claims of automatic confirmation and procedural impropriety.
DELHI TRANSCO LTD & ORS v. SHARAD CHANDRA SHARMA
The Delhi High Court held that dismissal without departmental inquiry under Regulation 10 is invalid unless the disciplinary authority records relevant material showing it is not reasonably practicable to hold such inquiry, and the authority must be competent to pass the order.
M/S RAKESH BROTHERS v. AREVA T & D INDIA LTD.
The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 due to the respondent's failure to appoint an arbitrator as per the arbitration agreement.
Manglu; Tara Chand; Rajesh Shukla v. State
The High Court upheld robbery convictions based on credible injured witness testimony but set aside the deadly weapon charge under Section 397 IPC due to insufficient proof, reducing the sentence accordingly.
Manpreet Singh Talwar v. Ravinder Nath Chopra and Anr
The Delhi High Court set aside ex parte orders against the defendant and allowed him to contest the suit on merits subject to costs, emphasizing fair trial and prevention of prejudice.
Jagjit Singh Saini v. Smita
The High Court upheld the order granting the respondent a one-time opportunity to defend the suit despite prior ex parte dismissal, emphasizing the interest of justice and imposing costs for delay.