Delhi High Court

29,725 judgments

Year:

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd v. Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council & Ors.

09 May 2023 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2023:DHC:3256

The Delhi High Court held that MSME registration obtained after contract completion does not confer retrospective benefits under the MSMED Act, setting aside the arbitration reference by the Facilitation Council.

civil appeal_allowed Significant MSMED Act 2006 MSME registration retrospective benefit works contract

Sanjay Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement

09 May 2023 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Manoj Jain · 2023:DHC:3341-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, directing the Adjudicating Authority to independently consider all valuation and related issues afresh at the final hearing under the PMLA.

criminal appeal_dismissed Procedural Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 valuation of assets Appellate Tribunal Adjudicating Authority

Himmat Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr.

09 May 2023 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2023:DHC:3311-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the BSF to decide the petitioners' representation for MACP benefits and arrears in accordance with a prior judgment within eight weeks, dismissing the writ petition.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant MACP scheme Modified Assured Career Progression arrears interest at 12%

Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd v. MS Parasvnath Developers Ltd

09 May 2023 · Navin Chawla · 2023:DHC:3095

The Delhi High Court held that a suit alleging latent defects discovered after a conciliation settlement is maintainable and not barred by limitation, dismissing the defendant's application to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC Settlement Deed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 latent defects

Rakesh and Ors. v. The State and Anr.

09 May 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:4272

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498A IPC

S.S. CON-BUILD PVT LTD v. Delhi Development Authority

09 May 2023 · Yashwant Varma · 2023:DHC:3092
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Disputes relating to lease termination and arrears under the Public Premises Act are non-arbitrable and fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Estate Officer, barring arbitration or civil court proceedings.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Non-arbitrability Estate Officer jurisdiction

Rajesh Kumar Sharma & Ors. v. The State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Anr.

09 May 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:3648

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from matrimonial disputes based on a genuine settlement and mutual consent divorce, emphasizing the court's power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent futile litigation.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute mutual consent divorce

Sheevam Transolutions Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 22(2) Delhi & Anr.

09 May 2023 · Rajiv Shakdher; Girish Kathpalia · 2023:DHC:4312-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside an income tax assessment order for failure to grant personal hearing, directing a fresh hearing in compliance with natural justice and CBDT guidelines.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148A personal hearing natural justice

Ramit Chhabra & Ors. v. The State (NCT) of Delhi & Anr.

09 May 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:4271

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes after the parties amicably settled and obtained a mutual consent divorce.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing FIR Section 482 CrPC matrimonial dispute Section 498A IPC

Ravi Prakash v. Union of India & Ors.

09 May 2023 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2023:DHC:3312-DB

The Delhi High Court directed respondents to decide the petitioner's pending representations on MACP benefits and recovery of increments within four weeks, restraining further recovery meanwhile.

administrative other Modified Assured Career Progression MACP annual increments service benefits

Employees State Insurance Corporation & Anr. v. Ajay Kumar & Ors.

09 May 2023 · V. Kameswar Rao; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2023:DHC:3185-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order allowing LTC claims by employees who booked tickets through unauthorized agents, subject to recovery of any excess fare over authorized agent rates.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Leave Travel Concession Authorized travel agents Recovery of LTC Employees State Insurance Corporation

Sumer Sharma & Anr. v. State and Anr.

09 May 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:4766

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from a family dispute under Sections 354, 506, and 34 IPC on the ground of amicable settlement and the complainant's unwillingness to proceed, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_allowed Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR amicable settlement family dispute

Janak Raj v. Union of India

09 May 2023 · V. Kameswar Rao; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2023:DHC:3186-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a government servant convicted by a trial court is not entitled to provisional pension during the pendency of appeal if the conviction itself is not stayed, validating permanent pension forfeiture under CCS Pension Rules.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant pension forfeiture conviction provisional pension CCS Pension Rules

Unikil Pesticides Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Anr.

09 May 2023 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Subramonium Prasad · 2023:DHC:3402-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the rejection of a 'me-too' insecticide registration application under Section 9(4) of the Insecticides Act, 1968, holding that such registration requires import from the same source as the original registration under Section 9(3).

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Insecticides Act, 1968 Section 9(3) Section 9(4) registration of insecticides

Sh. Genda Ram v. The State of NCT of Delhi

09 May 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:3736

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR and proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. following a voluntary and lawful settlement between parties in a private dispute.

criminal petition_allowed Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR private dispute amicable settlement

Himanshu Verma v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) and Anr

09 May 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:3735

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 354 IPC following an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR Section 354 IPC amicable settlement

Ajit Saxena v. Roshni Rajaram

09 May 2023 · Tushar Rao Gedela · 2023:DHC:3329

The Delhi High Court set aside costs imposed on counsel due to miscommunication during a virtual hearing and expunged adverse remarks against the counsel, disposing of the petition accordingly.

civil petition_allowed costs video conferencing miscommunication expungement of observations

Om Prakash & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

09 May 2023 · Siddharth Mridul; Talwant Singh · 2023:DHC:3905-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed street vendors holding valid certificates under the 2014 Act to continue vending in designated areas subject to compliance with certificate conditions until permanent sites are allotted.

administrative petition_allowed Street Vendors Act 2014 vending certificate Municipal Corporation of Delhi writ petition

Shri Mukul Sanwal v. Union of India

09 May 2023 · V. Kameswar Rao; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2023:DHC:3177-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the Government's discretionary denial of pension under Rule 5(1) of the AIS (DCRB) Rules must be reasoned, and directed the petitioner to challenge the fresh denial before the Central Administrative Tribunal.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant pensionary benefits All India Service (Death-Cum-Retiral Benefits) Rules, 1958 Rule 5(1) discretionary power

M/S. QUICKDEL LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. v. DELHI ARBITRATION CENTRE & ORS.

09 May 2023 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2023:DHC:3259

The Delhi High Court held that benefits under the MSMED Act cannot be claimed retrospectively by a supplier registered after contract and supply, setting aside arbitration proceedings initiated under the Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant MSMED Act 2006 registration date retrospective benefit arbitration