Delhi High Court

67,052 judgments

Year:

Lenminthang Baite v. Narcotics Control Bureau, Delhi

04 Aug 2022 · Poonam A. Bamba · 2022:DHC:2977

Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner involved in an inter-state narcotics case due to sufficient incriminating material and necessity of custodial interrogation.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant anticipatory bail Section 438 Cr.P.C. NDPS Act disclosure statement

M/S Scholastic India Pvt. Ltd. v. Smt. Kanta Batra

04 Aug 2022 · Vibhu Bahkru; Amit Mahajan · 2022:DHC:2952-DB

The Delhi High Court restored an arbitral award awarding damages for lease breach, holding that courts cannot reappreciate evidence under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and that arbitration proceedings are not bound by the Indian Evidence Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Section 65B Indian Evidence Act Lease Deed termination

Sunil Choudhary v. Union of India and Ors.

04 Aug 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Saurabh Banerjee · 2022:DHC:2966-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition challenging a cancelled transfer order, granting interim protection against a fresh transfer order and liberty to file a fresh petition.

administrative appeal_dismissed transfer order writ petition Article 226 interim protection

Balvinder Kaur Brar v. Baldev Singh Gill & Ors.

04 Aug 2022 · Rajiv Shakdher; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2022:DHC:3051-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed an appeal setting aside observations of admitted 50% share in deposited funds, upheld the maintainability of the appeal against review dismissal, and preserved parties' rights pending final trial.

civil appeal_allowed Significant interlocutory application review petition release of funds admission of share

R G Residency Pvt Ltd v. Sumit Bansal

04 Aug 2022 · Prateek Jalan · 2022:DHC:6024

The Delhi High Court held that unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is invalid and appointed an independent arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, allowing impleadment and additional documents in connected arbitration petitions.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant unilateral appointment arbitrator Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11

Ishma Arora v. State of NCT

04 Aug 2022 · Poonam A. Bamba · 2022:DHC:3041

Bail application of petitioner involved in multi-bank fraud using forged documents was dismissed due to her role as main accused, habitual offender status, and risk of tampering with evidence despite co-accused being granted bail.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail economic offence forgery criminal conspiracy

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7 v. Punjab & Sind Bank

04 Aug 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:3039-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT order directing payment of interest under Section 244A on refund of interest amounts paid under Sections 234D and 220(2) of the Income Tax Act, rejecting the Revenue's contention that such interest amounts to impermissible 'interest on interest'.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 244A interest on refund interest on interest

Ashok Gupta & Ors. v. Lalit Kumar Gupta & Anr.

04 Aug 2022 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:3014

The Delhi High Court allowed the transfer of a civil suit to the court having territorial jurisdiction over the property to ensure proper adjudication and avoid multiplicity of proceedings.

civil appeal_allowed transfer petition civil suit territorial jurisdiction property dispute

Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd & Anr. v. Akshar Foods and Beverages & Anr.

04 Aug 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:3932

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and damages to AMUL owners restraining defendants from publishing unverified defamatory articles disparaging the well-known 'AMUL' trademark, balancing freedom of speech with protection against commercial disparagement.

civil appeal_allowed Significant commercial disparagement defamation trademark infringement permanent injunction

Sardar Paramjit Singh Girgla v. Punjab & Sind Bank

04 Aug 2022 · Gaurang Kanth · 2022:DHC:3019

The Delhi High Court held that an employee reporting within 30 days of receipt of a notice under Clause 17 of the Bipartite Settlement cannot be deemed voluntarily retired, setting aside the bank's action and directing reinstatement without back wages.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Clause 17 Bipartite Settlement voluntary retirement unauthorized absence notice period

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S AGSON GLOBAL PVT LTD & ANR

04 Aug 2022 · Rajiv Shakdher; Jasmeet Singh · 2022:DHC:3078-DB

The Delhi High Court clarified that the Rs. 500 crore financial limit under ECLGS 4.0 applies sector-wise, modified interim relief against Indian Overseas Bank, and allowed parties to argue eligibility in the pending writ petition.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme 4.0 ECLGS financial limit sector-wise applicability

Rajesh Kumar Yadav & Anr. v. Ganesh Singh Yadav

04 Aug 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:3084
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The High Court upheld the trial court's rejection of a post-trial amendment application based on counsel's negligence, affirming the strict due diligence requirement under Order VI Rule 17 CPC and limiting supervisory interference under Article 227.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order VI Rule 17 CPC Amendment of pleadings Due diligence Article 227 Constitution of India

Aadil @ Nauserwa v. State

03 Aug 2022 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2023:DHC:517
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. in a serious sexual offence case, holding that strong and compelling reasons are required to suspend sentence post-conviction, especially when the appellant has not served half the sentence.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 389 Cr.P.C. Suspension of sentence Post-conviction bail POCSO Act

Bijender v. State; Bharat @ Kalu v. State

03 Aug 2022 · Mukta Gupta; Anish Dayal · 2022:DHC:3104-DB

The Delhi High Court acquitted appellants of murder charges due to serious discrepancies in prosecution evidence, failure to prove motive or tenancy, and lack of corroboration for recoveries and disclosure statements.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC disclosure statement dying declaration recovery of dead body

National Insurance Company Ltd v. Rajada & Ors.

03 Aug 2022 · Gaurang Kanth · 2022:DHC:3018

The Delhi High Court modified a motor accident compensation award by applying Delhi minimum wages, reducing future prospects addition to 40%, recalibrating non-pecuniary damages per Supreme Court guidelines, and rejecting negligence against the deceased.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim loss of dependency minimum wages future prospects

DSJ Infra Projects Pvt Ltd v. Team Colonisers Pvt Ltd

03 Aug 2022 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:3012

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking transfer of three civil suits pending before different courts at advanced stages, holding that such transfer would cause undue delay and is not permissible under Section 24 CPC.

civil petition_dismissed Section 24 CPC transfer of suits multiplicity of proceedings conflicting judgments

Bijender v. State; Bharat @ Kalu v. State

03 Aug 2022 · Mukta Gupta; Anish Dayal · 2022:DHC:3103-DB

The Delhi High Court acquitted appellants of murder charges due to irreconcilable discrepancies in prosecution evidence and failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 120B IPC dying declaration disclosure statement

Captain Adil Shah v. Air India Limited; Capt K Sai Sashanka v. Air India Ltd

03 Aug 2022 · Jyoti Singh · 2022:DHC:3237

The Delhi High Court clarified that back wages awarded for unlawful termination of pilots include Flying Allowance, directing Air India to pay the same with continuity of service.

labor petition_allowed Significant back wages flying allowance reinstatement continuity of service

Vageesh Kumar Shiva v. Delhi Technological University & Ors.

03 Aug 2022 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Subramonium Prasad · 2022:DHC:3027-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that a candidate who appeared as a General Category candidate and failed to qualify cannot claim admission under the Scheduled Caste category post-examination without prior declaration.

administrative appeal_dismissed UCEED 2022 admission eligibility reserved category Scheduled Caste

Dinesh Kumar v. University of Delhi & Ors.

03 Aug 2022 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2022:DHC:2925
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging termination of an ad-hoc caretaker for failure to acquire requisite qualifications, holding the termination lawful and not barred by res judicata or alternate remedy provisions.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant termination of service ad-hoc appointment regularisation res judicata