Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Amar Nath Gope v. Director General Coast Guard Headquarters
The Delhi High Court directed the Coast Guard to decide the petitioner's resignation application within eight weeks upon compliance with procedural formalities.
Sh Naveen Gupta v. State Bank of Hyderabad and Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the Debts Recovery Tribunal to expeditiously dispose of a decade-old securitisation application involving alleged fraudulent use of the petitioner's property documents.
Shyamji Srivastava & Another v. The Executive Engineer-M-311 of P.W.D. & Others
The Delhi High Court upheld the Labour Court's finding that no employer-employee relationship existed between contract labourers and the principal employer, dismissing the petition challenging their termination.
Arun Rai and Ors. v. Central Public Works Department through its Director General of Workers and Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the Labour Court's dismissal of workmen's claim for back wages against the principal employer under Section 33(C)(2) of the ID Act, holding no employer-employee relationship was proved and principal employer liability arises only after contractor's failure to pay.
Resham Devi & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted interim stay of demolition to petitioners whose properties fall within Khasra No. 37, directing status quo pending disposal of appeals under the Indian Forest Act, 1927, ensuring uniform protection for similarly placed persons.
Subhash Solanki v. Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against eviction of a shop occupant for unauthorized possession and construction, affirming that failure to comply with mutation procedures and violation of allotment terms justify eviction under the DUSIB Act, 2010.
Keshaw Sanyasi Gawo Shewasharam v. Govt of NCT and Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against eviction of premises not falling within a notified jhuggi cluster under the Delhi Slum and JJ Rehabilitation Policy, holding that eligibility requires prior notification and existence of the cluster before 2006.
Manas Seth v. Muncipal Corporation of Delhi and Others
The Delhi High Court directed authorities to adjudicate the petitioner’s representation on illegal constructions within six months, emphasizing timely administrative action.
Ashish Rastogi v. High Court of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that a full-time Law Officer employed by a PSU who regularly pleads in courts qualifies as a continuously practicing advocate for DHJS eligibility, setting aside the rejection of the petitioner’s candidature.
Dinesh Kumar & Others v. C.P.W.D. & Others
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Labour Court's award, holding that claims under Section 33(C)(2) of the ID Act require impleading contractors as necessary parties since they are the real employers liable for payment of minimum wages.
Saurabh Shukla v. Max Bupa Health Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed IRDAI and insurers to ensure inclusive health insurance coverage for persons with disabilities, mandating product design reforms and non-discriminatory terms in compliance with statutory and judicial mandates.
Sanghmitra R. Sandansing v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that the Municipal Corporation must conduct a comparative review of promotion cases applying uniform standards, setting aside the isolated consideration of the petitioner and making the junior officer's promotion provisional pending reconsideration.
Mr. Karam Hussain Mohabbat Ali Shah v. Mr. Abdul Latif Lakdawala
The Bombay High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, holding that the accused successfully rebutted the presumption of liability by proving non-delivery of goods and stop payment instructions.
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Manjula Kabiraj Das
The Bombay High Court upheld the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award, ruling that salary deductions for compensation exclude allowances except Income and Professional Tax, future prospects are justified, and compassionate employment or ex-gratia payments do not bar compensation claims.
Indian Railway Construction Company Limited v. M/s National Buildings Construction Corporation Limited
The Supreme Court upheld contract termination and forfeiture of security deposits under Clause 17.4 despite invalidity of termination under Clause 60.1 and restored the arbitral award granting reasonable interest on advances against hypothecation of equipment.
Indian Railway v. M/s National Buildings Construction Corporation Limited
The Supreme Court restored the arbitral award upholding contract termination under Clause 17.4 and forfeiture of security deposits, and allowed interest on advances at a reduced rate, overruling the High Court's interference.
Arnab Roy v. Consortium of National Law Universities & Anr
The Supreme Court upheld reasonable accommodation rights of disabled candidates in CLAT, validated certain scribe restrictions to preserve exam integrity, and mandated advance notification of disability-related guidelines.
Gujarat State v. Jayantibhai Ishwarbhai Patel
The Supreme Court held that acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is deposited and possession is taken, even if landowners refuse compensation, upholding the consent award and setting aside the High Court's order.
State of Gujarat v. Jayantibhai Ishwarbhai Patel
The Supreme Court held that acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is tendered or possession taken, even if the landowner refuses compensation or possession, thereby upholding the consent award and acquisition proceedings.
Gujarat State v. Jayantibhai Ishwarbhai Patel
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if either possession is taken or compensation is paid/offered, and landowners' refusal to accept compensation does not invalidate acquisition.