Delhi High Court

60,544 judgments

Year:

Sri Guru Singh Sabha v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

13 Dec 2022 · Rajiv Shakdher; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2023:DHC:24-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a registered society is not liable to maximum marginal tax under Section 167B and only surplus income after expenses is taxable, setting aside the lower authorities' orders.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 167B maximum marginal rate Societies Registration Act 1860

Pawanjot Kaur Sawhney v. Bureau of Immigration & Anr.

13 Dec 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:5559

The Delhi High Court refused interim permission to travel abroad to a petitioner under investigation for financial fraud due to non-cooperation and inadequate compliance with court-imposed conditions.

administrative petition_dismissed Look Out Circular Serious Fraud Investigation Office interim permission to travel bank account disclosure

D.S. Chewing Product LLP & Ors. v. Food Safety Officer

13 Dec 2022 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2022:DHC:5518

The Delhi High Court held that flavoured chewing tobacco products fall exclusively under COTPA, 2003 and not under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, quashing prosecution initiated under the latter.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 flavoured chewing tobacco jurisdiction

BIBA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED v. SHABNAM ENTERPRISES

13 Dec 2022 · CHANDRA DHARI SINGH · 2022:DHC:5671

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Section 9 petition for interim relief as the petitioner failed to demonstrate a manifest intention to invoke arbitration or initiate arbitral proceedings under the arbitration agreement.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration Act interim relief arbitral proceedings manifest intention to arbitrate

Western Digital Technologies, Inc & Anr v. SYT Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

13 Dec 2022 · Amit Bansal · 2022:DHC:5588

The Delhi High Court held that the Commissioner of Customs is neither a necessary nor a proper party in a trademark infringement suit and dismissed the application for impleadment during pending legal proceedings.

civil petition_dismissed Significant necessary party proper party Order 1 Rule 10 CPC Customs Act 1962

Saurabh Shukla v. Max Bupa Health Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.

13 Dec 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:5555

Delhi High Court held that insurance companies must provide health insurance to persons with disabilities without discrimination and directed IRDAI to ensure compliant product design and terminology.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant health insurance persons with disabilities discrimination IRDAI regulations

Ravi Saini v. State NCT of Delhi

13 Dec 2022 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2022:DHC:5517
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the framing of charges under Section 304B IPC for dowry death, holding that sufficient material existed to presume the offence and that interference at the charge framing stage was unwarranted.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 304B IPC Dowry death Framing of charge Section 498A IPC

M/S. Dalip Singh Adhikari v. M/S. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

13 Dec 2022 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2022:DHC:5509

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal holding that a written statement filed within the extended limitation period cannot be taken off record due to delay in re-filing documents with formal defects, emphasizing adjudication on merits over procedural technicalities.

civil appeal_allowed Significant written statement condonation of delay re-filing of documents limitation period

Rahul Singh and Harsh Kumar v. State of GNCT Delhi

13 Dec 2022 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:5881

Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to co-accused in assault case under Section 438 CrPC on grounds of parity and cooperation with investigation despite addition of non-bailable Section 195-A IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC Section 195-A IPC parity principle

Maha Nand Sharma & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

12 Dec 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:5514
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court allowed reactivation of directors' DIN and DSC by setting aside their disqualification under the Companies Act, 2013, applying the non-retrospective effect of Section 167(1)(a) and the CFSS-2020 scheme.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant Director Identification Number Digital Signature Certificate Companies Act 2013 Section 164(2)(a)

DFM FOODS LTD v. ISHVI FOOD PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.

12 Dec 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:5501

The Delhi High Court recorded a settlement in a trademark infringement suit acknowledging infringement and passing off, disposing of the suit on agreed terms binding the parties.

civil settled trademark infringement passing off settlement agreement Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre

Benita Sharma v. Anil Kumar Sharma

12 Dec 2022 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2022:DHC:5498

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings against a General Manager for lack of prima facie case and abuse of process, emphasizing the need for judicial mind and specific allegations to implicate under Section 34 IPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of complaint summoning order Section 34 IPC

Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. v. Harpal Singh

12 Dec 2022 · Vibhu BakhrU; Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2022:DHC:5569-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the setting aside of an arbitral award due to violation of natural justice by denying cross-examination, while clarifying that courts cannot modify arbitral awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 natural justice cross-examination

Bhim Sen v. Mukul Kumar & Anr.

12 Dec 2022 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2022:DHC:5585-DB

The High Court held that a third party, such as a father, has no locus standi to seek a declaration on the marital status of his daughter's husband under Section 7(1)(b) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, dismissing the petition as not maintainable.

family appeal_dismissed Significant Family Courts Act, 1984 Section 7(1)(b) locus standi marital status declaration

M/S H.QR.P. LIMITED & Ors. v. M/S M.T.I LIMITED & Ors.

12 Dec 2022 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2022:DHC:5613

The Delhi High Court dismissed the defendants' application to stay a suit under Section 10 CPC, holding that the issues and parties in the suit were not directly and substantially in issue in previously instituted suits.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 10 CPC stay of suit multiplicity of proceedings directly and substantially in issue

Vinod Kumar v. Intellectual Property Appellate Board

12 Dec 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:5508

The Delhi High Court quashed the IPAB order rejecting adjournment based on social media evidence without hearing, restoring the rectification petitions for re-hearing and emphasizing natural justice principles.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant adjournment principles of natural justice social media evidence Intellectual Property Appellate Board

Food Corporation of India v. Govt. of India & Ors.

12 Dec 2022 · Gaurang Kanth · 2022:DHC:5471

The Delhi High Court held that Assistant Managers of Food Corporation of India are not 'workmen' under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, setting aside the Labour Court's direction to grant them selection grade from 1971.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 2(s) definition of workman Assistant Managers Selection grade

Partha Ghosh v. Registrar of Companies & Union of India

12 Dec 2022 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2022:DHC:5499
Cites 5 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed a complaint against a statutory auditor under the Companies Act as barred by the six-month limitation period, reaffirming the binding precedent that limitation commences from the date of actionable knowledge of the offence.

criminal petition_allowed Significant limitation period Section 233 Companies Act Section 468 Cr.P.C. statutory auditor

Babu & Co & Ors. v. Deepanshu Goel

12 Dec 2022 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2022:DHC:5550

The Delhi High Court set aside the Trial Court's order closing defence evidence in a cheque dishonour case and granted the accused a final opportunity to lead defence evidence under Section 311 Cr.P.C., emphasizing the importance of a fair trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 311 Cr.P.C. Negotiable Instruments Act Dishonour of cheque Defence evidence

Rekha Rani v. Ajay Kumar Sharma

12 Dec 2022 · Tushar Rao Gedela · 2022:DHC:5532

The Delhi High Court directed the trial court to permit reliance on statements in the reply under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC during final arguments and ordered expeditious disposal of the long-pending civil petition.

civil appeal_allowed Order 6 Rule 17 CPC admissions in pleadings final arguments trial court discretion