Delhi High Court

93,563 judgments

Year:

Ekta Mahar & Ors. v. Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University & Ors.

13 Feb 2024 · Tushar Rao Gedela · 2024:DHC:1168

The Delhi High Court directed the university to consider the petitioners' claim as a representation and decide it within two weeks, without ordering immediate appointment, emphasizing administrative discretion and lawful procedure.

administrative petition_dismissed writ petition appointment cancellation Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University DoPT OM

Sahebrao Kashinath Muneshwar v. Union of India

13 Feb 2024 · Chandra Dhari Singh
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court held that contractual employees appointed under the TV 2020 scheme are not entitled to regularization or permanent absorption absent sanctioned regular posts and proper recruitment process.

labor petition_dismissed Significant contractual employment regularization Technology Vision 2020 TIFAC

Ajanta Soya Limited v. The Oriental Insurance Company

13 Feb 2024 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2024:DHC:1114
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award due to inordinate delay violating Section 29A of the Arbitration Act but extended the tribunal's mandate till March 2024 considering the pandemic-related circumstances.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 29A Arbitration and Conciliation Act extension of arbitral mandate inordinate delay in arbitration public policy violation

Maahi Neil Jaipal v. University of Delhi & Ors.

13 Feb 2024 · Rajiv Shakdher; Amit Bansal · 2024:DHC:1050-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of a foreign national seeking admission under a supernumerary quota in the University of Delhi's integrated five-year law programmes for 2023-2024, holding no quota was prescribed for that year.

administrative appeal_dismissed foreign nationals quota supernumerary seats University of Delhi integrated five-year law programme

Gaurav Kumar v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

13 Feb 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:1120

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking transfer of investigation, holding that the petitioner’s remedy under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is available and it is premature to interfere under Article 226 or Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_dismissed Article 226 Constitution Section 482 Cr.P.C. Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. FIR registration

Government of NCT of Delhi v. Raj Kumar Saini

13 Feb 2024 · Rekha Palli; Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2024:DHC:1093-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's quashing of a charge memorandum due to inordinate and unexplained delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings against a government officer.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings charge memorandum inordinate delay Central Administrative Tribunal

Ajit Singh v. State

13 Feb 2024 · Navin Chawla · 2024:DHC:1095

The Delhi High Court granted bail to Ajit Singh in a murder conspiracy case, holding that weak prima facie evidence and mere suspicion do not justify denial of bail under Article 21.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Section 439 CrPC conspiracy call data records

Union of India v. Jagdish Rai

13 Feb 2024 · Rekha Palli; Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2024:DHC:1099-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing that the respondent's entire service period, except a specified gap, be counted for pension benefits due to absence of termination and limitation not starting before retirement.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant qualifying service pension benefits re-engagement termination

Commissioner CGST Delhi South v. M/S Nitin Industries

13 Feb 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:1192-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against a refund order under the CGST Act on the ground that the tax effect was below the prescribed threshold and no constitutional or legality challenge was raised.

tax appeal_dismissed CGST Act 2017 Section 142(3) refund tax effect threshold

M/S K.M Food Infrastructure Pvt Ltd v. The Director General DGGI Headquarters, New Delhi & Anr.

13 Feb 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:1081-DB

The Delhi High Court held that seizure of currency under Section 67(2) of the CGST Act is impermissible as money is excluded from 'goods', and directed the return of seized cash to the petitioners.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 67 CGST Act seizure of currency definition of goods search and seizure powers

Bahadur Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

13 Feb 2024 · The Acting Chief Justice; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2024:DHC:1499-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that a belated Section 11 application challenging a 1958 Bhumidhari Certificate is barred by limitation and res judicata, and only a person in cultivatory possession has locus to maintain such a claim under the Delhi Land Reforms Act.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 Section 11 application Bhumidhari Certificate limitation

Axis Bank Ltd v. UV Assets Reconstruction Co

13 Feb 2024 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2024:DHC:1407

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award awarding ECGC claim monies to the assignee, holding that limited grounds under Section 34 do not permit setting aside the award despite overlapping insolvency proceedings and limitation objections.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Patent illegality Public policy

Nokia Technologies OY v. Vivo Mobile Communication Co., Ltd

13 Feb 2024 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2024:DHC:1329

The Delhi High Court recorded a global settlement between Nokia and Vivo resolving all patent infringement and FRAND disputes, leading to dismissal of the suit and connected proceedings.

civil settled Standard Essential Patents Patent Infringement FRAND Settlement Agreement

Nokia Technologies OY v. Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. & Ors.

13 Feb 2024 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2024:DHC:1328

The Delhi High Court recorded a global settlement between Nokia and Oppo resolving patent infringement disputes and dismissed the suit and counterclaims accordingly.

intellectual_property settled patent infringement standard essential patents FRAND rate interim injunction

Nokia Technologies OY v. Vivo Mobile Communication Co Ltd & Ors.

13 Feb 2024 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2024:DHC:1340

The Delhi High Court recorded a global settlement between Nokia and Vivo in a patent infringement suit, dismissed the suit and counterclaim as withdrawn, and allowed deletion of confidential records.

intellectual_property settled patent infringement FRAND rate settlement agreement Order XXIII Rule 1 and 3 CPC

Nokia Technologies OY v. Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd.

13 Feb 2024 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2024:DHC:1291

The Delhi High Court recorded a global settlement between Nokia and Oppo in a patent infringement suit involving SEPs, dismissed the suit and counterclaims, and directed refund of pro-tem deposits.

intellectual_property petition_allowed Standard Essential Patents Patent Infringement FRAND Interim Injunction

Hem Chand v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

13 Feb 2024 · Tushar Rao Gedela · 2024:DHC:1167

The Delhi High Court directed the Government to dispose of the petitioner's representation regarding land demarcation within eight weeks, without prejudicing jurisdictional objections.

constitutional petition_allowed Article 226 Constitution of India mandamus land demarcation urbanization notification

Devendra Singh Rana v. Union of India & Ors.

13 Feb 2024 · V. Kameswar Rao; Saurabh Banerjee · 2024:DHC:1076-DB

The Delhi High Court held that withdrawal of a voluntary retirement request by a government servant requires Appointing Authority approval, and rejection of such withdrawal without reasons is not legally impermissible, dismissing the petitioner’s challenge.

administrative petition_dismissed voluntary retirement withdrawal of retirement request Appointing Authority approval CRPF Rules 1955

Sarita Garg v. Aman Gupta & Ors.

13 Feb 2024 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2024:DHC:1191

The court held that a suit challenging a registered Will and seeking consequential reliefs like Partition is maintainable if filed within three years of knowledge, and such reliefs can be claimed in the same suit under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant registered Will declaration and cancellation partition suit Section 34 Specific Relief Act

Nicholas Nzube Ukaegbu v. Narcotic Control Bureau

13 Feb 2024 · Navin Chawla · 2024:DHC:1102
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the accused in an NDPS case due to non-compliance with mandatory sample-drawing procedures under Section 52A, which vitiated the prosecution's primary evidence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 52A NDPS Act bail under NDPS Act sampling procedure primary evidence