Delhi High Court

71,423 judgments

Year:

Shashi Pal v. Union of India; Tej Bahadur v. Union of India

14 Jul 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Saurabh Banerjee · 2022:DHC:2612-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of petitions challenging promotion orders by directing fresh consideration in light of the Supreme Court's Jarnail Singh judgment and DoPT guidelines on reservation in promotions.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant reservation in promotion promotion order quashing Department of Personnel and Training Jarnail Singh judgment

Chaman Lal Marwah v. Nazir Ul Islam & Ors.

14 Jul 2022 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:2611
Cites 0 · Cited by 6

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of the petitioner's objections to eviction, holding that an unregistered and unstamped lease deed is invalid, statements under Order X Rule 2 CPC are not substantive evidence, and a co-owner cannot create tenancy binding on others without consent.

civil petition_dismissed Significant lease deed registration unstamped document Order X Rule 2 CPC

Apple India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Delhi VAT

14 Jul 2022 · Rajiv Shakdher; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2022:DHC:2801-DB

The Delhi High Court held that revisionary jurisdiction under Section 74A of the Delhi VAT Act cannot be invoked without demonstrating that the impugned order is both erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, and set aside the revision notice against Apple India's classification of Apple Watch.

tax petition_allowed Significant Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 Section 74A revisionary jurisdiction classification of goods Apple Watch VAT classification

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-20 v. Mamta Agarwal

14 Jul 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:2761-DB

The Delhi High Court held that additions to income under Section 153A cannot be made for a completed assessment year in absence of incriminating material found during search, dismissing the department's appeal.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 153A Income Tax Act incriminating material completed assessment search and seizure

SRF LTD v. Union of India & Anr.

14 Jul 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:2601-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court directed DSIR to issue certification reports in Form 3CL for the petitioner’s R&D expenditure for assessment years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2020-21, enabling weighted tax deductions under Section 35(2AB) of the Income Tax Act.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 35(2AB) Income Tax Act Form 3CL DSIR R&D expenditure deduction

Army Welfare Housing Organisation v. Presiding Officer & Ors.

14 Jul 2022 · Gaurang Kanth · 2022:DHC:2653

The Delhi High Court held that disciplinary enquiries must follow Central Civil Services Rules when adopted contractually, invalidated the petitioner’s enquiry for non-compliance, and substituted reinstatement with monetary compensation in a fixed-term employment dispute.

labor appeal_partly_allowed Significant domestic enquiry Central Civil Services Rules principles of natural justice fixed term employment

Sarvinder Singh & Anr. v. Vipul Tandon

14 Jul 2022 · Amit Bansal · 2022:DHC:2577

The Delhi High Court held that executing courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate title and possession disputes in execution proceedings, and dispossession without due process under Order XXI Rule 97 CPC is unlawful, while pendente lite transfers are not void ab initio but subject to suit outcome.

civil other Significant Order XXI CPC Execution proceedings Lis pendens Transfer of Property Act Section 52

Frankfinn Aviation Services Private Limited v. M/S Frankfinn Creations & Ors.

13 Jul 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:2603

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and damages to the Plaintiff against unauthorized use of the well-known trademark 'FRANKFINN' by the Defendants, ordered transfer of the infringing domain name, and held the Defendants in contempt for obstructing court orders.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement passing off unfair competition dilution

Delhi Tourism & Transportation Development Corporation Ltd. v. Barefoot Holidays India Pvt Ltd

13 Jul 2022 · Anu Malhotra · 2022:DHC:2551

The Delhi High Court upheld condonation of delay in filing an appeal under the Public Premises Act, holding that service of the eviction order by email alone was invalid and limitation did not commence until proper service was effected.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 Section 9(2) condonation of delay service of eviction order valid service under Public Premises Act

Knitpro International v. Examiner of Trade Marks

13 Jul 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:2631

The Delhi High Court upheld the rejection of a shape trademark application for a knitting needle, emphasizing that shape marks require distinctiveness and secondary meaning to qualify for registration.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant shape trademark secondary meaning distinctiveness Trade Marks Act 1999

Rishikesh Poddar & Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

13 Jul 2022 · Talwant Singh · 2022:DHC:3006

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR involving matrimonial offences including Section 377 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties under its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 377 IPC

M/S Ocean Knit Fab Inner Wear v. Sunil Gupta

13 Jul 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:2685

The High Court held that a party should not be denied the right to cross-examine a witness due to counsel's single absence, directing the Labour Court to allow cross-examination with no further adjournments.

labor appeal_allowed Significant ex parte proceeding cross-examination counsel absence right to prosecute

Vageesh Kumar Shiva v. Delhi Technological University & Ors.

13 Jul 2022 · Sanjeev Narula · 2022:DHC:2622

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging DTU’s exclusion of the petitioner from admission, holding that qualification in UCEED-2022 under the correct category is mandatory and admission cannot be granted based on raw scores alone.

administrative petition_dismissed UCEED-2022 Bachelor of Design admission Delhi Technological University minimum qualifying marks

Snapdeal Private Limited v. Godaddycom LLC and Ors.

13 Jul 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:2579
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that blanket injunctions restraining domain name registrars from offering any domain names containing a registered trademark cannot be granted without identifying specific infringing domain names and directed the creation of an independent mechanism within registrars to address trademark infringement complaints.

civil appeal_allowed Significant quia timet injunction trademark infringement domain name registrars interim injunction

Firoz Ahmad v. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi

13 Jul 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:2582

The Delhi High Court declined to impose a strict timeline for disposal of a pending consumer appeal under its supervisory jurisdiction, directing only expeditious disposal without prioritizing the petitioner’s case.

civil petition_dismissed Article 227 Constitution of India State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission supervisory jurisdiction delay in disposal

Delhi Electrical Contractor Welfare Association v. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd and Anr

13 Jul 2022 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Subramonium Prasad · 2022:DHC:2567-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the increased financial turnover requirement in BSES power distribution tenders, ruling it was neither arbitrary nor violative of Article 14, and declined judicial interference under Article 226.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant tender conditions financial qualifying criteria Article 14 Article 226

M/S Ocean Knit Fab Inner Wear v. Mahesh Jha

13 Jul 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:2684

The Delhi High Court held that a party should be granted an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses despite counsel's single absence, emphasizing the fundamental right to effectively prosecute proceedings.

labour appeal_allowed Significant ex parte proceeding cross-examination fundamental right to legal remedies duty to diligently pursue case

Harpreet Singh Batra v. Karmawali & Ors.

13 Jul 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:2672
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed the trial court's order allowing reopening of evidence for further cross-examination of a witness after closure of evidence, holding that inherent powers under Section 151 CPC must be exercised sparingly and with adequate reasons.

civil petition_allowed Significant Order 18 Rule 17 CPC Section 151 CPC recall of witness inherent powers of court

Puran v. The State

13 Jul 2022 · Mukta Gupta; Anish Dayal · 2022:DHC:2555-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence of the appellant for aggravated penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act, emphasizing breach of trust and relying on victim testimony and DNA evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act aggravated penetrative sexual assault position of trust DNA evidence

Chugai Seiyaku Kabushiki Kaisha & Anr. v. Hetero Labs Limited & Anr.

13 Jul 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:2604

The Delhi High Court held that import and use of patented Alectinib for research and regulatory purposes under Section 107A of the Patents Act does not infringe the patent, but restrained any commercial manufacture or launch by the defendants during the patent term.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Indian Patent No. 294424 Alectinib Section 107A Patents Act Bolar provision