Delhi High Court

71,673 judgments

Year:

Zakir Khan v. Union of India

02 May 2022 · Siddharth Mridul; Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2022:DHC:1666-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed COFEPOSA detention orders due to non-supply and supply of illegible relied upon documents, which vitiated the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction and violated constitutional safeguards under Article 22(5).

criminal petition_allowed Significant preventive detention COFEPOSA relied upon documents illegible documents

Union of India v. Indian Agro Marketing Co Operative Ltd

02 May 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:1710

The Delhi High Court held that arbitral tribunals have the power to recall termination orders under Section 25(a) of the Arbitration Act and directed the arbitrator to consider the petitioner’s recall applications, allowing the petitions under Article 227 due to absence of alternate remedy.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 25(a) Termination of arbitral proceedings Recall of arbitral orders

Garg Builders v. Hindustan Prefab Limited & Anr.

02 May 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:1673

Judgment delivered by Delhi High Court in a commercial dispute between Garg Builders and Hindustan Prefab Limited.

commercial other commercial dispute Garg Builders Hindustan Prefab Limited Delhi High Court

M/S Garg Builders v. Hindustan Prefab Ltd. & Anr.

02 May 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:1671

Judgment in a commercial dispute between M/s Garg Builders and Hindustan Prefab Ltd. delivered by Delhi High Court on 2nd September 2021.

civil other commercial dispute Delhi High Court petition interlocutory applications

Garg Builders v. Hindustan Prefab Ltd. & Anr.

02 May 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:1670
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that invocation of unconditional bank guarantees cannot be restrained except in exceptional cases of egregious fraud or irretrievable injustice, dismissing the petitioner’s plea to stay invocation pending arbitration.

civil petition_dismissed Significant bank guarantee invocation unconditional bank guarantee interim relief

GOEL ROAD CARRIERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-10(2), DELHI & ANR

02 May 2022 · Manmohan; Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:1696-DB

The Delhi High Court held that recovery of disputed tax demand beyond 20% without reasons and stay is unauthorized, directing refund of excess amounts adjusted without due procedure.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 220(6) stay of recovery disputed tax demand

Seven Seas Hospitality Private Limited v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central, Delhi - 3 & Ors.

02 May 2022 · Manmohan; Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:1695-DB

The Delhi High Court held that tax authorities must exercise discretion judiciously and pass reasoned orders with personal hearing when deciding stay applications under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, allowing relaxation of the 20% deposit condition in appropriate cases.

tax remanded Significant stay of demand Section 220(6) Income Tax Act tax demand deposit discretion of tax authorities

Rajesh Gupta and Others v. Dinesh Gupta and Others

02 May 2022 · Vibhu BakhrU · 2022:DHC:1681

The Delhi High Court upheld the Arbitral Tribunal’s refusal to entertain premature counter-claims lacking a cause of action under the Family Settlements, affirming the Tribunal’s jurisdictional authority under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 16 jurisdiction Cause of action Family Settlements

Jindal Exports and Imports Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 13-1 & Ors.

02 May 2022 · Manmohan; Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:1698-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside reassessment orders issued in the name of a non-existing company and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after providing the petitioner adequate opportunity of hearing.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 147 Section 143(3)

Rachit Malhotra v. One97 Communications Ltd

02 May 2022 · Rajiv Shakdher; Poonam A. Bamba · 2022:DHC:1814-DB

The Delhi High Court clarified that interlocutory observations do not bar the appellant from arguing that his rights under an ESOP scheme did not lapse, allowing the appeal and vacating the interim order.

civil appeal_allowed ESOP scheme lapse of rights interlocutory order employee stock options

Chhavi v. University of Delhi

01 May 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:4155

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the University of Delhi's restriction limiting the number of papers in the Second Centenary Chance examination, holding that academic policy decisions are within the university's exclusive discretion and not subject to judicial interference absent arbitrariness.

constitutional petition_dismissed academic policy Centenary Chance University of Delhi examination attempts

CLN ENERGY PVT. LTD. v. E ASHWA AUTOMOTIVE PRIVATE LIMITED

01 May 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5567
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to resolve disputes arising from a contract containing a valid arbitration clause after the respondent failed to cooperate.

arbitration petition_allowed Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act appointment of arbitrator arbitration clause arbitrability

Mainudeen v. State

29 Apr 2022 · Mukta Gupta · 2022:DHC:1660

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellant for robbery with a deadly weapon and illegal possession of arms, rejecting challenges based on discrepancies in the victim’s statement and lack of documentary proof of ownership.

criminal appeal_dismissed robbery Section 392 IPC Section 397 IPC deadly weapon

Harinder Singh Chawla v. Rupinder Nayar

29 Apr 2022 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2022:DHC:1613

The Delhi High Court allowed the defendant's appeal permitting production of the original Will only upon court direction and for forensic examination, balancing the need for evidence with procedural efficiency.

civil appeal_allowed Will production of original Will genuineness of Will forensic examination

Rajesh Kumar Gupta v. CBSE

29 Apr 2022 · Najmi Waziri; Swarana Kanta Sharma Najmi Waziri · 2022:DHC:1908-DB

The High Court dismissed the writ petition for failure to exhaust the statutory appeal remedy and held that procedural orders complied with do not warrant judicial interference.

administrative petition_dismissed statutory remedy disciplinary proceedings Central Administrative Tribunal writ petition

Yogesh Middha v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi (South) and Ors

29 Apr 2022 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2022:DHC:1684

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging illegal construction for lack of locus standi and absence of infringement of fundamental or legal rights, emphasizing that only affected parties or municipal authorities can seek such relief under Article 226.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Article 226 illegal construction locus standi fundamental rights

M/S MM9 INTERNATIONAL v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

29 Apr 2022 · Manmohan; Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:1686-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside an order and notice under the Income Tax Act for failure to grant the mandatory minimum statutory time to the assessee, emphasizing compliance with procedural safeguards and natural justice.

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

Amit Gupta v. Directorate General of GST Intelligence Headquarters

29 Apr 2022 · Mukta Gupta · 2022:DHC:1661

The Delhi High Court held that reversal of Input Tax Credit in the electronic ledger is a valid mode of satisfying bail deposit conditions under the CGST Act and set aside the cancellation of bail on this ground.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Input Tax Credit Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 bail conditions electronic credit ledger

Deepak Madan v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

29 Apr 2022 · Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2022:DHC:5962

The Delhi High Court granted transit anticipatory bail for 14 days to the petitioner apprehending arrest, subject to conditions ensuring cooperation with investigation, clarifying that the order is interim and without prejudice to trial.

criminal bail_granted transit anticipatory bail Section 438 Cr.P.C. Section 482 Cr.P.C. false implication

Pradeep Kumar Chhabra v. Kumud Sharma@ Karun Sharma

29 Apr 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:1841
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the maintainability of a suit based on title and ownership despite prior withdrawal of an eviction petition without liberty to file a fresh suit, holding the two proceedings involve distinct subject matters under Order XXIII Rule 1 CPC.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order XXIII Rule 1 CPC withdrawal of suit subject matter Delhi Rent Control Act