Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Punjab & Sind Bank v. Nand Lal Phatnani
The Delhi High Court upheld that departmental proceedings against pensioners cannot be initiated for events older than four years under Regulation 48(2) of the Punjab & Sind Bank Pension Regulations, dismissing the bank's appeal.
Punjab & Sind Bank v. Nand Lal Phatnani
The Delhi High Court upheld that departmental proceedings against pensioners cannot be initiated for events older than four years under Punjab & Sind Bank Pension Regulations, dismissing the bank's appeals.
Punjab & Sind Bank v. Nand Lal Phatnani
The Delhi High Court held that departmental proceedings against pensioners cannot be initiated for misconduct occurring more than four years prior, upholding the limitation under Regulation 48(2) of the Punjab & Sind Bank Pension Regulations.
Punjab & Sind Bank v. Nand Lal Phatnani
The Delhi High Court upheld that departmental proceedings against pensioners cannot be initiated for events older than four years under Punjab & Sind Bank Pension Regulations, dismissing the bank's appeal.
Punjab & Sind Bank v. Nand Lal Phatnani
The Delhi High Court upheld that departmental proceedings against pensioners are barred if initiated more than four years after the alleged misconduct under Regulation 48(2) of Punjab & Sind Bank Pension Regulations, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in State of UP v. Krishna Pandey.
Bharti Infratel Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Another
The Delhi High Court held that reassessment beyond four years under Section 147 is invalid if the assessee has fully and truly disclosed all material facts, and reopening on mere change of opinion is impermissible.
Lovely Jogindersingh Sethi v. Nayeem Riyaz Khan & Ors.
The Bombay High Court upheld eviction of tenant on grounds of bonafide requirement, default in rent, and nuisance, affirming applicability of Section 16(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act and rejecting the tenant's challenge.
Archana v. Himanshu Bahl
The Delhi High Court upheld the annulment of marriage on grounds of mental cruelty, finding the wife’s allegations false and her conduct cruel towards the husband.
M/S I.C.D.S. LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MYSORE & ANR.
The Supreme Court held that a leasing company is the owner of vehicles leased out and entitled to claim depreciation, including at higher rates, under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act despite registration in lessees' names under the Motor Vehicles Act.
UOI & Ors. v. Abhishekh Dixit
The Delhi High Court upheld the Ministry of Home Affairs' flexible interpretation of the 1985 roster system for cadre allocation, overturning the CAT's strict merit-cycle approach and dismissing the respondent's challenge.
Babu Lal Yadav v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the petitioner’s premature discharge from the Indian Army, holding that the discharge was lawful and voluntary with no infirmity or illegality.
Bhagwan Singh v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a retired employee found fit by a DPC is entitled to notional promotion and pensionary benefits even if actual promotion is denied due to retirement before the DPC.
Mr. Shivam Tiwari; Ms. Urmila Sharma; Ms. Deepika Kalra; Ms. Venni Kakkar v. OM PRAKASH
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order directing payment of interest on delayed leave encashment benefits, holding that withholding such benefits requires a specific decision under Rule 39(3) CCS Leave Rules and that interest can be awarded for unreasonable delay even without statutory provision.
Essar Shipping Limited v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court quashed a DGFT show cause notice as barred by res judicata, holding that a clarificatory policy circular operates prospectively and settled export incentive claims cannot be reopened retrospectively.
Hersheys India Pvt. Ltd. v. Kanti Beverages Pvt. Ltd.
The Bombay High Court partially set aside an arbitral award directing Rs. 75 lakhs compensation for implied contract renewal, holding such compensation unsupported by evidence and severable from the valid portions of the award.
Metal Box India Ltd. v. M/s. S.F. Engineer
A public limited company losing rent control protection under Maharashtra Rent Control Act due to paid-up share capital exceeding Rs. 1 crore as on 31 March 2000 cannot regain such protection by subsequent reduction of share capital.
Deepali Dinesh Naik v. Pramila Dilip Deshmukh
The Bombay High Court held that disputes solely concerning grant of higher pay scale without dismissal, reduction in rank, or supersession do not fall within the School Tribunal's jurisdiction under Section 9 of the MEPS Act, dismissing the writ petition.
Krishan Kumar & Anr v. Shakuntla Agency Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging an arbitral award for specific performance, holding that the petitioners' failure to participate and raise objections during arbitration precluded reappreciation of facts under Section 34.
Krishan Kumar & Anr v. Shakuntla Agency Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition, holding that an arbitral award cannot be challenged on grounds of documents not placed before the tribunal and refused to remand the matter for reconsideration.
Hiraman Nivrutti Tupe v. Sou. Vijaymala Vinayak Bazare
The High Court set aside the Trial Court's order condoning delay to set aside an ex-parte decree, holding the explanation false and the discretion exercised perversely.