Delhi High Court

104,190 judgments

Year:

Delhi Transport Corporation v. Sarjeevan Kumar

21 Jan 2013 · D. Murugesan; V. K. Jain · 2013:DHC:333-DB

The Delhi High Court held that full backwages upon reinstatement after illegal dismissal is not automatic and must be judicially determined with reasons, reducing the award from full to 50% backwages in this case.

labor appeal_allowed Significant backwages reinstatement industrial dispute illegal dismissal

Albert Samuel Trikha v. The Managing Director, Indian Airlines Limited & Anr.

21 Jan 2013 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2013:DHC:335

The Delhi High Court upheld disciplinary penalty against an employee for taking a housing loan despite owning a house, emphasizing the burden of proof on the employee and applicability of service rules prohibiting such loans.

service_law appeal_dismissed Significant housing loan service rules disciplinary action false information

UOI AND ORS v. JAY PRESTRESSED PRODUCTS LTD

21 Jan 2013 · Sanjay Kishan Kaul; Indermeet Kaur · 2013:DHC:7386-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed appeals challenging interim orders under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that such orders should not be interfered with during ongoing arbitration proceedings.

arbitration appeal_dismissed Section 9 Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 interim orders arbitration proceedings appellate interference

Sanjana Kapoor v. Sunil Kapoor

21 Jan 2013 · V. K. Shali · 2013:DHC:7389

The Delhi High Court disposed of two cross petitions by the parties' mutual settlement, ending the dispute amicably without adjudication.

civil settled settlement cross petitions disposal of case High Court of Delhi

Air India Ltd v. Delhi Offices and Establishment Employees Union

21 Jan 2013 · Vipin Sanghi · 2013:DHC:7448

The Delhi High Court upheld that casual workers engaged over 240 days are entitled to retrenchment compensation under Section 25-F, denying reinstatement but protecting their rights against arbitrary termination and fresh casual appointments.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant casual workers Section 25-F Industrial Disputes Act retrenchment interim orders

TRIPLE ESS COMMUNICATION PVT LTD v. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT & ANOTHER

21 Jan 2013 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2013:DHC:7564

The Delhi High Court protected a lawful tenderer’s right to display advertisements by restraining PWD from removing advertisements pending due process in an inter-departmental dispute.

administrative appeal_allowed writ petition advertisement rights tender award inter-departmental dispute

Lalit Sharma v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

21 Jan 2013 · Sunil Gaur · 2013:DHC:7613

The Delhi High Court dismissed pre-arrest bail applications in a road rage case, emphasizing the gravity of offences and prior criminal antecedents over conflicting versions and individual liberty.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant pre-arrest bail road rage criminal antecedents conflicting versions

Mr.Ajay K.Shanna, Advocate. . v. THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LTD .....

21 Jan 2013 · HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL; HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE... · 2013:DHC:7682-DB

The Delhi High Court held that civil imprisonment under the RDDBFI Act cannot be imposed on debtors lacking sufficient means or assets, setting aside a DRAT order requiring pre-deposit and remanding for reconsideration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 civil imprisonment pre-deposit Article 21

Ramesh Chand v. Khem Chand

21 Jan 2013 · V. K. Shali · 2013:DHC:8019

The High Court set aside an ex-parte custody decree favoring the father, emphasizing the child's welfare over procedural technicalities and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

family appeal_allowed Significant custody of minor ex-parte decree welfare of child service of summons

Devesh Sharma v. State & Anr.

21 Jan 2013 · G.P. Mittal · 2013:DHC:8338

The Delhi High Court restored a complaint under Section 138 NI Act dismissed for non-prosecution due to a bona fide mistake in noting the hearing date, emphasizing that procedural lapses should not defeat substantive rights.

criminal appeal_allowed Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act non-prosecution dismissal restoration of complaint mediation settlement

Fancy Fashions v. Balaji Enterprises

21 Jan 2013 · Mukta Gupta · 2013:DHC:8341

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal restoring a complaint dismissed for non-appearance under Section 256 Cr.P.C., emphasizing discretion to restore where non-appearance is due to unavoidable reasons and the complainant has prosecuted the case diligently.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 256 Cr.P.C. dismissal for non-appearance complaint restoration authorized representative

Rakesh Kumar v. Kapur Chand & Sons

21 Jan 2013 · Pratibha Rani · 2013:DHC:8452

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioners to withdraw three revision petitions and dismissed them as withdrawn without adjudicating on merits.

other appeal_dismissed Procedural withdrawal of petitions revision petitions leave to withdraw dismissal as withdrawn

Florentine Estates of India Ltd & Anr. v. Lokesh Dahiya & Anr.

18 Jan 2013 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2022:DHC:4742

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition for appointment of arbitrator filed by Petitioner No.1 due to lack of locus standi and non-compliance with mandatory notice requirements under the Arbitration Act, rejecting invocation of the Doctrine of Group of Companies.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 21 Doctrine of Group of Companies

Rakesh Mohan Mittal v. Keshava Singh & Co

17 Jan 2013 · Pratibha Rani · 2013:DHC:8453

The Delhi High Court dismissed three review petitions as withdrawn following an amicable settlement between the parties.

other other review petition settlement withdrawal stay application

Remfry and Sagar v. Commissioner of Income Tax

17 Jan 2013 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R. V. Easwar

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of reopening income tax assessments on the ground that the assessee failed to furnish the primary fact of the licence agreement, rejecting the plea of mere change of opinion.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 147 Section 148 Reopening of assessment

M/s G.N. Bros v. Union of India & Ors

17 Jan 2013 · 2013:DHC:7140

The Delhi High Court upheld the forfeiture of export security deposit where the petitioner failed to fulfill export obligations due to legal impediments known prior to quota allotment, rejecting force majeure claims.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant export quota forfeiture Interest-bearing Monetary Deposit force majeure

Rakesh Gupta v. State

17 Jan 2013 · S. P. Garg · 2013:DHC:6654

The High Court dismissed the criminal miscellaneous petitions filed by Rakesh Gupta for non-prosecution due to his repeated failure to appear despite multiple notices.

criminal petition_dismissed non-prosecution dismissal of petition failure to appear criminal miscellaneous petition

Amit Rahi v. Jawahar Lal Nehru University & Ors.

17 Jan 2013 · HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J · 2013:DHC:277-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the university's decision denying Ph.D. admission due to the appellant's CGPA not meeting the prescribed eligibility on the 10-point grading scale, emphasizing limited judicial interference in academic matters.

administrative appeal_dismissed eligibility criteria grading scale equivalence academic authority Ph.D. admission

Remfry and Sagar v. Commissioner of Income Tax

17 Jan 2013 · S. Ravindra Bhat; R. V. Easwar · 2013:DHC:297-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of reopening income tax assessments on the ground that the assessee failed to furnish the primary fact—the licence agreement—during original assessments, distinguishing failure to disclose from mere change of opinion.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Reopening of assessment Primary facts

DTC v. Hanumant Kumar

17 Jan 2013 · Vipin Sanghi · 2013:DHC:307

The Delhi High Court held that absence of a presenting officer or welfare officer does not vitiate a departmental inquiry if conducted fairly, and upheld the dismissal of an employee for unauthorized absence.

labor appeal_allowed Significant departmental inquiry principles of natural justice presenting officer Labour Welfare Officer