Delhi High Court

29,724 judgments

Year:

Arvind v. Union of India & Ors.

12 Nov 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:10121-DB

The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the Tribunal's refusal to condone a 1180-day delay in filing an Original Application against an APAR, holding that vague reasons and counsel's inaction do not justify condonation of delay.

administrative petition_dismissed condonation of delay Annual Performance Appraisal Report Original Application Central Administrative Tribunal

Parmod @ Bihari v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

12 Nov 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:10124

The Delhi High Court set aside the appellant's conviction under Sections 394 and 397 IPC due to unreliable medical evidence but upheld conviction under Section 411 IPC for possession of stolen property, granting partial relief as the appellant had already served the sentence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant robbery Section 394 IPC Section 397 IPC Section 411 IPC

Delhi Development Authority v. Deepak Jain

12 Nov 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:10067-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court set aside the Tribunal's order quashing a delayed Charge Memo against an engineer, holding that delay alone is not fatal if justified, and directed expeditious completion of disciplinary proceedings.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant delay in disciplinary proceedings charge memo prejudice to defense disciplinary action

Mohsin Ahmad v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi); Neelam v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

12 Nov 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:10114
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions under Sections 308/34 and 451/34 IPC but modified the sentence to release the appellants on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, emphasizing reformative justice.

criminal sentence_modified Significant Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 Section 308 IPC Section 451 IPC common intention

Prakash Oil Corporation v. Delhi Development Authority

12 Nov 2025 · Jyoti Singh · 2025:DHC:10057

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioners' challenge to a demand for payment at prevalent market rates for land allotment, upholding earlier court directions and the DDA Rules, 1981.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Development Authority Disposal of Developed Nazul Land Rules, 1981 pre-determined rates prevalent market rates

Waraich v. Maneesh Kumar

12 Nov 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:9996-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's direction for a fresh medical examination due to procedural deficiencies in prior medical boards, dismissing the petition challenging the order.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant medical examination medical fitness Central Administrative Tribunal Review Medical Examination Board

Firoj Khan v. Addl. Commissioner of Custom

12 Nov 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:9992-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Customs authority's order confiscating undeclared gold jewellery and imposing penalty, permitting redemption on payment of fine and duty, while dismissing the petitioner's challenge to the order.

administrative petition_dismissed Customs Act, 1962 confiscation penalty undeclared goods

Sakshi Goyal Proprietor of Mis Parshavnath Industries v. Principal Commissioner Central GST, Delhi

12 Nov 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:9993-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the retrospective cancellation of GST registration for failure to consider amended business address and directed fresh adjudication with opportunity for personal hearing.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant GST registration cancellation Show Cause Notice amendment of business address Input Tax Credit investigation

Mohammad Noman Rana v. The Commissioner of Custom & Ors.

12 Nov 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:9995-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that detention of gold bars without issuance of show cause notice and personal hearing under the Customs Act is unlawful, invalidated the waiver of these rights, and ordered release of the goods upon payment of customs duty.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs Act 1962 Section 124 show cause notice personal hearing

Intzar Ahmad v. The Commissioner of Custom & Ors.

12 Nov 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:9997-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that detention of goods without issuance of Show Cause Notice and personal hearing under the Customs Act is unlawful, invalidating waivers signed by tourists and ordering release of seized gold bars.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs Act 1962 Show Cause Notice Section 124 Section 110

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Commissioner of Customs, ICD PPG and Other ICDs

12 Nov 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:9999-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court condoned delay and restored BSNL's appeal before CESTAT for merits hearing on penalty imposed under Customs Act despite procedural delay.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Customs Act, 1962 condonation of delay penalty under Section 114A voluntary payment of duty

Mam Raj Hari Ram v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

12 Nov 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:9946-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside a GST demand order passed without personal hearing, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication while leaving the validity of related GST notifications to the Supreme Court's pending decision.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 168A GST Act Show Cause Notice principles of natural justice personal hearing

MS Markex Branding Solutions Pvt Ltd v. The Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax & Ors.

12 Nov 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:9945-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte GST demand order for lack of opportunity to be heard, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication while leaving the validity of extension notifications open pending Supreme Court decision.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Goods and Services Tax Section 168A CGST Act Show Cause Notice Natural Justice

M/S UNIFIRE SYSTEMS v. M/S INNOVATIVE TEXTILES PVT LTD & ORS

12 Nov 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:10012

The Delhi High Court held that a trial court lacking territorial jurisdiction cannot adjudicate a suit on merits and set aside the partial decree, directing the suit to be filed before the proper court.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Section 20(b) CPC registered office civil suit

Balesh Devi & Ors. v. Royal Sundaram Alliance Co. Ltd. & Ors.

12 Nov 2025 · Prateek Jalan · 2025:DHC:9985

The Delhi High Court held that married daughters are entitled to compensation as legal dependents under the Motor Vehicles Act, enhancing the award accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 compensation married daughters legal dependents

Upendra Nath Dalai v. Union of India Ministry of Home Affairs

12 Nov 2025 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2025:DHC:9998-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL challenging certain provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, holding that courts cannot direct Parliament to legislate and warning against repetitive frivolous petitions.

constitutional petition_dismissed Public Interest Litigation Article 226 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 Constitutionality

Dishaa Groverr v. Union Bank of India

12 Nov 2025 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2025:DHC:9994-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL challenging a bank's withdrawal of a sale notice after accepting a settlement, holding that a petitioner with personal interest cannot maintain a PIL and warning against misuse of public interest litigation provisions.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Public Interest Litigation One Time Settlement Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 auction withdrawal

Anupreet Kaur Gulati v. Gurpreet Singh Gulati

12 Nov 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:9875-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the wife’s appeal to reopen evidence and produce witnesses in a divorce proceeding, emphasizing the right to a fair opportunity despite procedural delays.

family appeal_allowed Significant Family Courts Act, 1984 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 reopening evidence fair opportunity

Om Prakash Irla v. Union of India & Anr.

12 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:9927-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the compulsory retirement of a BSF officer for extra-marital misconduct, holding that dispensing with a General Security Force Court trial under Rule 20(2) of the BSF Rules was lawful and not subject to interference under Article 226.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Border Security Force Rules, 1969 Rule 20(2) General Security Force Court Compulsory retirement

K. Vivek Kumar v. Union of India and Anr

12 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:9928-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking ante-dating of seniority for non-joinder of affected parties, directing the petitioner to implead all persons whose seniority would be impacted before re-filing.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant seniority ante-dating writ petition impleading parties