Delhi High Court

46,428 judgments

Year:

Union of India v. Deep Chandra Tiwari

18 Nov 2024 · C. Hari Shankar; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:9087-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's ruling that recovery of alleged overpayments from a retired railway employee beyond five years and post-retirement is impermissible, and any pay scale reduction must follow due process.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant recovery of overpayment retired employees pay fixation Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity

M/S MONEYWISE FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED v. EHPS EVER HOLIDAY PLANNERS SERVICES

18 Nov 2024 · Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:8900
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate loan repayment disputes where the respondent defaulted and failed to respond to arbitration notice.

civil appeal_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 petition appointment of sole arbitrator arbitration clause

The Supreme Industries Limited v. Ankit Goel Trading as Goel Trading Company

18 Nov 2024 · Mini Pushkarna · 2024:DHC:9049

The Delhi High Court held that each fresh act of trademark infringement gives rise to a new cause of action permitting a fresh suit and allowed the appeal decreeing the second suit for infringement of the mark 'SUPREME WATERLINE'.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement passing off fresh cause of action res judicata

Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. v. Sagar Vilas Dhanawade and Anr.

18 Nov 2024 · Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:8908

Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate loan recovery disputes arising from a valid arbitration agreement despite respondents' non-appearance.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Loan Agreement Sole Arbitrator Appointment

Union of India v. Commissioner of North Delhi Municipal Corporation

18 Nov 2024 · Prateek Jalan · 2024:DHC:8978

The Delhi High Court dismissed writ petitions filed by the Union of India seeking recovery of maintenance charges from MCD for Road Under Bridges, holding that writ jurisdiction is inappropriate for disputed monetary claims involving delay and factual controversies.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant writ jurisdiction Article 226 Railways Act 1989 maintenance charges

Pravesh Kumar v. Delhi Jal Board

18 Nov 2024 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2024:DHC:8970

The Delhi High Court held Delhi Jal Board liable for the death of a minor child due to negligence, applying res ipsa loquitur and awarding Rs. 22 lakh compensation under Article 226 for violation of Article 21.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant Article 21 Article 226 res ipsa loquitur compensation

M/S CHIBBA AGRO PVT LTD v. NARENDER KUMAR GUPTA

18 Nov 2024 · Rekha Palli; Saurabh Banerjee · 2024:DHC:8873-DB

The Delhi High Court held that invocation of pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is mandatory but failure to settle does not vitiate compliance, and dismissed the appeal challenging the suit's maintainability.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 12A Commercial Courts Act pre-litigation mediation Non-Starter Report mandatory mediation

M/S GLAZEBROOKE TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED v. M/S ORBIS TRUSTEESHIP SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.

18 Nov 2024 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2024:DHC:8947

The Delhi High Court quashed a cheque bounce complaint filed one day beyond the limitation period without condonation, holding that service of demand notice on the company suffices for its directors and limitation runs from the date of effective service on the company.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 NI Act limitation period demand notice service

Abdus Samad & Anr. v. Principal District and Sessions Judge South

18 Nov 2024 · Sanjeev Narula · 2024:DHC:8946
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the allotment of a vacant chamber slot to a senior advocate, ruling that seniority governs re-allotment in absence of specific rules and that a co-allottee's NOC does not confer priority.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Lawyers Chamber Allotment Re-allotment Saket District Court Rule 9

Aakash Goel v. Union of India & Ors.

18 Nov 2024 · Manmohan, CJ; Tushar Rao Gedela, J · 2024:DHC:8923-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a public interest petition seeking directions to LIC and MHA for issuance of PMJJBY policy documents and sharing death data, holding that such matters involve private contracts and require concrete evidence for judicial intervention.

administrative petition_dismissed Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana Life Insurance Corporation of India policy documents insurance claims

Hare Ram Singh v. Reserve Bank of India & Ors.

18 Nov 2024 · Dharmesh Sharma · 2024:DHC:8816
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held SBI liable for unauthorized electronic banking transactions due to cyber fraud, directing full compensation to the victim under RBI guidelines, emphasizing bank’s duty to protect customers and promptly address fraud.

civil appeal_allowed Significant cyber fraud vishing phishing unauthorized electronic banking transactions

M/s BPL Limited v. M/s Morgan Securities & Credits Pvt. Ltd.

18 Nov 2024 · Yashwant Varma; Dharmesh Sharma · 2024:DHC:8799-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition challenging an arbitral award upholding high contractual interest rates and held that such review cannot be used as an appeal to re-agitate settled issues absent an error apparent on the face of the record.

civil petition_dismissed Significant review petition Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC arbitral award interest rate

Anita Gupta Sharma v. Chamber Allotment Committee and Others

18 Nov 2024 · Yashwant Varma; Dharmesh Sharma · 2024:DHC:8869-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging chamber allotment to senior advocates, holding that medical grounds relating to a spouse do not justify re-allotment and emphasizing seniority and procedural fairness.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant chamber allotment seniority medical grounds transparency

Ajay Kumar v. Govt. of NCT Delhi and Ors.

14 Nov 2024 · C. Hari Shankar; Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2024:DHC:8515-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed the rejection of a petitioner's claim for absorption and relaxation in recruitment qualifications due to lack of evidence and remitted the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.

administrative petition_allowed Significant absorption in service relaxation in age and educational qualifications intermittent engagement employment records

Vikas Nagar v. Union of India and Ors.

14 Nov 2024 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2024:DHC:8877-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court allowed a petitioner with pending but stayed criminal charges to join CISF employment subject to termination upon conviction, setting aside the screening committee's rejection.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant employment suitability pending criminal charges stay of criminal proceedings screening committee

K.A. Gupta v. UOI & Ors.

14 Nov 2024 · Jyoti Singh · 2024:DHC:9455

The Delhi High Court quashed disciplinary proceedings and penalty imposed on an employee as the inquiry was vitiated by the participation of prosecution witnesses in the disciplinary authority, violating natural justice principles.

administrative petition_allowed Significant natural justice disciplinary inquiry bias nemo debet esse judex in propria causa

Smt. Shiny Boby Raj and Anr. v. Tata AIG Gen Ins Co Ltd. & Anr.

14 Nov 2024 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2024:DHC:9482

The Delhi High Court held that mere smell of alcohol without quantifiable blood alcohol evidence is insufficient to establish intoxication or breach of insurance policy, setting aside recovery rights against the vehicle owner.

motor_vehicles appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185 MVA Intoxication Blood alcohol content

Techno Global Services Private Limited v. Gail India Limited & Anr

14 Nov 2024 · Sachin Datta
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11 stage, only prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement is to be examined and appointed an independent sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes including those arising from suspension and banning, leaving arbitrability issues to the tribunal.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator arbitrability exclusion clause

Techno Global Services Private Limited v. Gail (India) Limited

14 Nov 2024 · Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:8826
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11 stage, only prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement is to be examined and appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes, leaving arbitrability objections to the arbitral tribunal.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator Excepted matters clause Arbitrability

Munna v. Om Wati

14 Nov 2024 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2024:DHC:9323

The Delhi High Court held that a revision petition challenging an eviction order becomes infructuous and is not maintainable once possession of the premises has been legally restored to the landlord through execution proceedings.

property petition_dismissed Significant revision petition eviction possession restoration Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958