Delhi High Court

59,687 judgments

Year:

Dr. D. Srinivas Rajesh v. Union of India; Dr. Ashutosh Bajpai v. Union of India

28 Sep 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Saurabh Banerjee · 2022:DHC:4020-DB

The Delhi High Court directed promotion of petitioners to DIG (Medical) by excluding allegations prior to the relevant period and mandating adherence to DoPT OM 2017 criteria.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant promotion Departmental Promotion Committee DoPT OM 2017 Annual Confidential Reports

Shri Ram Dass Malik v. Shri Raja Badami & Ors.

28 Sep 2022 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:4068
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the transfer petition holding that a counter claim exceeding the pecuniary jurisdiction of the trial court is not maintainable and does not justify transfer of the suit to a higher court.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order 8 Rule 6A CPC counter claim pecuniary jurisdiction transfer petition

Vineet Anand v. Kiran Anand and Sons HUF

28 Sep 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:4064

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging ex-parte orders for non-filing of written statement due to unexplained delay, upholding the trial court’s discretion while allowing the petitioner to continue participating in the suit.

civil petition_dismissed Article 227 Constitution of India Order VIII Rule 1 CPC Order IX Rule 7 CPC ex-parte proceedings

Vinita Gupta v. Amit Arora

28 Sep 2022 · Jyoti Singh · 2022:DHC:4060

Delhi High Court granted injunction in passing off suit holding that prior user of trademark APPLESTREE was entitled to protection against defendant's deceptively similar mark NUAPPLEPLANT despite defendant's registration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant passing off prior user rights trademark similarity semantic similarity

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation 2 Delhi v. New Skies Satellite BV

28 Sep 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:4056-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal holding that satellite transmission receipts do not constitute 'royalty' under the India-Netherlands DTAA, following its earlier binding precedent.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement royalty satellite transmission services Income Tax Act 1961

Col. Anand Prakash Gupta and others v. The State

28 Sep 2022 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:4048

The Delhi High Court allowed the transfer of a probate case involving immovable properties beyond the trial court's territorial jurisdiction and exceeding Rs. 10,000 in value, in accordance with Section 273 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

civil appeal_allowed Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 273 letters of administration probate

Amresh Shukla v. Directorate General, C.I.S.F. and Anr.

28 Sep 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Saurabh Banerjee · 2022:DHC:3976-DB

In absence of a tie-breaker rule in CISF recruitment notification, seniority between candidates with equal marks must be determined by age, entitling the petitioner to selection as Assistant Commandant (EXE) through LDCE-2010-2011.

administrative petition_allowed Significant tie-breaker principle age seniority LDCE Assistant Commandant CISF

Arnav Tyagi v. Union of India

28 Sep 2022 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Subramonium Prasad · 2022:DHC:3970-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of a ward of an invalidated ex-serviceman seeking reservation in school admission, holding no legal or policy provision entitles him to such benefit absent qualifying the entrance exam.

administrative appeal_dismissed reservation armed forces personnel invalidated from service admission

Sanjeet Kumar Agrawal v. Delhi Development Authority

28 Sep 2022 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Subramonium Prasad · 2022:DHC:3967-DB

The Delhi High Court held that price fixation under the DDA Housing Scheme is a contractual matter not amenable to writ jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal challenging the demand-cum-allotment letter.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant DDA Housing Scheme 2021 writ jurisdiction Article 226 contractual dispute

NAS v. DELHI GUEST HOUSE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

28 Sep 2022 · Amit Bansal · 2022:DHC:3936
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the plaintiff's interim right to possession of the family property under a trust deed, lifting the corporate veil of the family company to prevent misuse by the defendant.

civil appeal_allowed Significant interim injunction corporate veil lifting family trust quasi-partnership

Sushant Gambhir & Ors. v. MRJ Infratech Limited & Ors.

28 Sep 2022 · Mini Pushkarna · 2022:DHC:4132

The Delhi High Court held that Section 34(4) of the Arbitration Act permits remand only to cure reasoning deficiencies in an arbitral award, not to reappraise or modify rejected claims, and dismissed the petition seeking such remand.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 34(4) Arbitration and Conciliation Act remand of arbitral award arbitral award modification interest on award

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Delhi v. Petrotech

28 Sep 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:4059-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeals against ITAT's grant of exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act to Petrotech, adhering to its prior decision pending Supreme Court's final adjudication.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 11 exemption Section 12 exemption charitable activities

Sanjay Thapar v. Income Tax Officer, Circle 49(1)

28 Sep 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:4058-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act for failing to provide the mandatory seven-day period to respond, remanding the matter for fresh consideration.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 148A(b) Income Tax Act mandatory period to respond ex-parte order notice under Section 148

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.

28 Sep 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:4057-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Income Tax Department to comply with the final Tribunal order by passing the appeal effect order and granting the petitioner’s tax refund with interest within twelve weeks.

tax petition_allowed Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Appeal effect order Tax refund Section 240 Income Tax Act

M/S Manoj Finvest Pvt. Ltd v. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax-4 & Ors.

28 Sep 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:4054-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the tax authorities to accept the petitioner's settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, setting aside the rejection based on a quashed CBDT FAQ.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 Section 115JB Income Tax Act Section 143(1) Income Tax Act CBDT Circular No. 21/2020

Civitech Developers Private Limited v. The Income Tax Officer Ward & Anr.

28 Sep 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:4052-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the reassessment order and notice under Sections 148 and 148A of the Income Tax Act for AY 2016-17 due to non-consideration of the assessee's detailed reply, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication with liberty to submit supporting documents.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 148A reassessment proceedings

Sumant Investments Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

28 Sep 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:4051-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside tax notices issued in the name of a non-existent company post-amalgamation, holding such notices invalid under the Income Tax Act.

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

SH Ravinder Kumar v. SH Mam Raj & Anr.

28 Sep 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:4045

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal, holding that summons served on a male family member constituted valid service and that concurrent factual findings on service cannot be disturbed in a second appeal under Section 100 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed service of summons ex parte decree Order IX Rule 13 CPC Section 100 CPC

Monu Singh v. State

28 Sep 2022 · Mukta Gupta; Anish Dayal · 2022:DHC:4034-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of three appellants for murder based on credible eyewitness and forensic evidence, rejecting challenges to FIR registration, TIP refusal, and common intention.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant murder Section 302 IPC common intention eyewitness testimony

Manoj Kumar Agrawal v. Delhi Development Authority

28 Sep 2022 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Subramonium Prasad · 2022:DHC:3968-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the price fixation and possession timeline under the DDA Housing Scheme, holding that such contractual matters are not amenable to writ jurisdiction and the appellant was estopped from raising objections after participating in the draw of lots.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant DDA Housing Scheme 2021 demand-cum-allotment letter price fixation writ jurisdiction