Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Vaibhav Oberoi v. Nimisha Dua
The Delhi High Court allowed the appellant's appeal against the Family Court's order refusing to take his written statement on record, subject to costs deposited for welfare purposes.
Bindu Sharma v. State of NCT of Delhi
The High Court set aside the dismissal of an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for lack of reasons and directed the trial court to reconsider it with proper application of mind.
M/S Whirlpool of India Ltd. v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner
The Delhi High Court held that canteen allowance paid in cash to employees forms part of 'basic wages' under the Employees Provident Funds Act and is liable for provident fund contributions, rejecting the claim that it is merely 'cash value of food concession'.
UOI & Anr. v. Kiran Pal Singh
The Delhi High Court upheld that a deputationist absorbed in a borrowing department is entitled to count his parent department service for seniority if the posts are equivalent, regardless of pay scale differences or prior waiver.
Varun Maurya v. Sumit Chauhan
The Delhi High Court held that a suit for recovery of rent and damages under a lease agreement is not maintainable as a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC without proper termination and evidence, and must be tried as an ordinary commercial suit.
The State (NCT of Delhi) v. Aarif
The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's application for condonation of a 547-day delay in filing a criminal appeal against acquittal, holding that unexplained delay beyond the COVID-19 exclusion period cannot be condoned.
Ravi Batra v. New IFS Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that procedural defects in filing a Section 34 petition do not render it invalid and condoned a 9-day delay in re-filing due to counsel's medical emergency.
Rajiv Sharma v. M/S Balaji Enterprises & Anr.
The High Court allowed deletion of a non-proprietor defendant from a commercial suit, holding that only the sole proprietor is liable for the firm's debts and mere communication does not establish legal liability.
Kamdhenu Ltd v. The Registrar of Trade Marks
The Delhi High Court held that affidavit evidence is not mandatory for declaring a trademark well-known under the Trade Marks Act and Rules, and the Registrar must allow an opportunity to cure defects before rejecting such applications.
Subhash Chandra Raswant v. Alokesh Barua
The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of a tenant who failed to establish possession under an agreement to sell and continued to pay rent, holding that the tenant was not entitled to protection under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.
Delhi Transport Corporation v. Narender Kumar
The Delhi High Court held that rejection of approval under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act renders dismissal void ab initio, entitling the workman to reinstatement with back wages, and set aside an ex parte award passed without disclosing this fact.
The State (GNCT of Delhi) v. Mohd. Haider
The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's application for condonation of a 462-day delay in filing a Criminal Leave Petition against an acquittal, emphasizing the need for plausible explanation and timely prosecution of appeals.
Central Warehousing Corpn. v. Ekpal Singh
The Delhi High Court set aside a Labour Court award reinstating a chowkidar terminated for submitting forged educational documents, holding the Labour Court lacked jurisdiction and termination was justified under applicable regulations.
SHRI CHARANJEET SINGH & ANR. v. SHRI HARVINDER SINGH & ANR.
The Delhi High Court rejected the suit seeking declaration of joint ownership and cancellation of sale deed on grounds of no cause of action, limitation bar, and applicability of the Benami Transactions Act, holding the property as absolute ownership of defendant No.2.
Yogesh v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court upheld the decision declaring the petitioner medically unfit for Indian Coast Guard recruitment, holding that the final medical examination by expert boards is conclusive and not subject to judicial interference.
Kishor Bandekar and Ors. v. Mahesh Candolkar and Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld that the Goa Chess Association's rules do not restrict the Executive Committee to one representative per taluka, dismissing the appeal challenging multiple representatives from the same taluka.
Divisional Engineer Telecom v. Munshi Prasad & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld divisional seniority-based retrenchment of casual labourers in the Railway Electrification Project, setting aside the Labour Court's award of reinstatement and back wages.
SMC Global Securities Limited v. Pankaj Singh @ Love Kumar & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award compensating an investor for actual loss from unauthorized stock transactions, rejecting claims that the loss was notional or barred by NSE Bye Laws.
Neeta Bhardwaj & Ors. v. Kamlesh Sharma
The Delhi High Court directed supervised demarcation and redevelopment of Kalkaji Mandir land, regulated street vendors outside the premises, and allowed intervention of affected parties including the Lotus Temple and a third-party contractor.
Dhara Singh v. Union Bank of India
The Delhi High Court upheld the compulsory retirement of a bank clerk for misappropriation of customer funds, affirming limited judicial interference in departmental enquiries where procedural fairness and evidence exist.