Delhi High Court

94,906 judgments

Year:

Majestic Handicraft Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

27 Mar 2023 · Rajiv Shakdher; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2023:DHC:2320-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside reassessment notices and order under the Income Tax Act for lack of due diligence by the Assessing Officer and directed a fresh examination with opportunity to the petitioner.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148A(b) Section 148A(d) Section 148

MODI INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS.

27 Mar 2023 · Rajiv Shakdher; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2023:DHC:2501-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the reassessment notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2014-15 due to non-consideration of objections and absence of non-disclosure of material facts, directing the Assessing Officer to reconsider within four weeks.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Reassessment Assessment Year 2014-15

MODI INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS.

27 Mar 2023 · Rajiv Shakdher; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2023:DHC:2500-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside reassessment proceedings initiated on the basis of a change of opinion, holding that such reassessment under Sections 147/148 of the Income Tax Act is impermissible without tangible material, while allowing the AO liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law.

tax petition_allowed Significant reassessment change of opinion Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 147

Santosh Kumar Sahu & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

27 Mar 2023 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2023:DHC:2304
Cites 0 · Cited by 6

Delhi High Court held that employees of AIESL have no vested right to retain government accommodation post-Air India privatization and penal rent deductions require due process under the Public Premises Act.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Air India Housing Allotment Rules, 2017 Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 penal rent privatization

Dabur India Limited v. Ashok Kumar and Ors.

27 Mar 2023 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2023:DHC:2305

Delhi High Court directs coordinated enforcement against non-compliant domain name registrars infringing trademarks, endorsing blocking under IT Act and emphasizing compliance with intermediary guidelines.

civil other Significant domain name infringement domain name registrar Information Technology Act, 2000 Section 69A IT Act

Sachin Chadha v. BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd

27 Mar 2023 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2023:DHC:2199

The Delhi High Court directed BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd to grant electricity connection to the petitioner without requiring NOC from co-owners, subject to commercial formalities, without recognizing ownership rights.

administrative other electricity connection No Objection Certificate occupant codal formalities

Shiv Mangal Singh v. Panna Lal & Ors.

27 Mar 2023 · Tushar Rao Gedela · 2023:DHC:2341

The Delhi High Court held that interlocutory observations on possession in a contempt application are prima facie and do not prejudice trial rights, refusing to interfere with the Trial Court's dismissal of the contempt application.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order XXXIX Rule 2(A) CPC status quo possession Article 227 Constitution of India

Yashwant Sahu & Anr. v. Ashok Kumar & Anr.

27 Mar 2023 · HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA; TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.... · 2023:DHC:2342

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the closure of an appeal for violation of Section 35B CPC due to delay, laches, and non-payment of costs, upholding the procedural bar against leading evidence after pleadings.

civil petition_dismissed Section 35B CPC Order IX Rule 13 CPC Delhi Rent Control Act delay and laches

M/S SUPER ADS v. ALL INDIA RADIO (AKASHVANI) & ORS.

27 Mar 2023 · Navin Chawla · 2023:DHC:2127
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

Clause 14 of the Agreement empowering the DG, AIR to decide disputes is not an arbitration agreement, and thus the suit for recovery is maintainable without mandatory reference to arbitration.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration Agreement Section 8 Arbitration and Conciliation Act Internal Dispute Resolution Expert Determination

Govind Swarup & Anr v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

27 Mar 2023 · Tushar Rao Gedela · 2023:DHC:2326

The Delhi High Court directed the Municipal Corporation of Delhi to produce records related to a sealed shop before the appellate tribunal, holding that delay in disposal of the petitioners' application was prejudicial and the application had become infructuous.

civil petition_dismissed Section 151 CPC production of documents sealing order demolition order

Amanpreet Kohli v. Pankaj Dayal

27 Mar 2023 · Navin Chawla · 2023:DHC:2135

The Delhi High Court held that a loan dispute between real estate merchants supported by mercantile documents qualifies as a commercial dispute and granted conditional summary judgment directing the defendant to deposit the claimed amount as security.

civil appeal_allowed Significant commercial dispute summary judgment Order XIIIA CPC loan agreement

M/S S N MALHOTRA AND SONS v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

27 Mar 2023 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2023:DHC:2355
Cites 0 · Cited by 9

The Delhi High Court directed the Municipal Corporation of Delhi to release principal payments due on duly approved bills to the petitioner within eight weeks, rejecting the Corporation's policy delaying payments based on fund availability.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Municipal Corporation payments approved bills contractor payments reasonable time for payment

IRCON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED v. PIONEER FABRICATORS PVT. LTD.

27 Mar 2023 · V. KAMESWAR RAO; ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA · 2023:DHC:2153-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the exclusive jurisdiction clause in the contract governs the territorial jurisdiction to challenge an arbitral award under the MSMED Act, setting aside the order dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant MSMED Act Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 territorial jurisdiction exclusive jurisdiction clause

Union of India v. Om Prakash

27 Mar 2023 · V. Kameswar Rao; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2023:DHC:2163-DB

The Delhi High Court held that for ACP/MACP benefits, regular service starts from the date of absorption into a new post, and prior service cannot be counted, setting aside the Tribunal’s order granting second ACP benefits notionally from initial appointment.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Assured Career Progression Scheme Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme financial upgradation absorption

Amit Gulia v. The State

27 Mar 2023 · Mukta Gupta; Poonam A. Bamba · 2023:DHC:2172-DB

Bhisham Sharma alias Sidharth Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi)

27 Mar 2023 · Mukta Gupta; Poonam A. Bamba · 2023:DHC:2175-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's criminal appeal, upholding his conviction after affirming that the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt and the trial court's findings were sound.

criminal appeal_dismissed conviction appreciation of evidence reasonable doubt trial court findings

Manoj Gulia v. State NCT of Delhi

27 Mar 2023 · Mukta Gupta; Poonam A. Bamba · 2023:DHC:2176-DB

M/S AMBIENCE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS PVT LTD v. M/S MEDUSA FASHION

27 Mar 2023 · CHANDRA DHARI SINGH · 2023:DHC:2270

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act to adjudicate disputes arising from a valid arbitration clause in a commercial MoU, emphasizing the Act's intent for efficient dispute resolution.

civil appeal_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) appointment of arbitrator arbitration clause

Microsoft Corporation v. The Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs

27 Mar 2023 · Sanjeev Narula · 2023:DHC:2331

The Delhi High Court set aside the rejection of Microsoft's patent application for lack of clear reasoning and remanded it for fresh consideration with proper opportunity to amend claims and in light of settled patentability principles.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant patent application method step format Section 3(k) Patents Act Section 10 Patents Act

Dabur India Limited v. The Advertising Standards Council of India

27 Mar 2023 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2023:DHC:2364
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's application to file additional documents at a belated stage, holding that the documents were irrelevant and not necessary for adjudication under Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC additional documents relevance and necessity belated filing