Delhi High Court

29,725 judgments

Year:

Treco Wire India Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax and Ors.

24 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8667-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging a GST order confirming demand and penalty for fraudulent ITC, holding that the limitation period for appeal had lapsed and principles of natural justice were complied with.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Input Tax Credit CGST Act Section 107 limitation fraudulent ITC

Smt Gopi Chhetri v. Union of India & Anr

24 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8597-DB

The High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition as the relief sought had already been granted, disposing of the petition accordingly.

constitutional petition_dismissed writ petition withdrawal of petition relief granted disposal of petition

Union of India & Ors. v. Chatur Singh & Ors.

24 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing regularization of long-serving casual Monument Attendants, clarifying that continuous performance of essential duties for over ten years warrants regularization despite initial temporary status.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant regularization of casual employees perennial duties continuous service Uma Devi judgment

Shannu Baghel v. Union of India & Anr.

24 Sep 2025 · The Chief Justice; Tushar Rao Gedela; Devendra Kumar Upadhya... · 2025:DHC:8507-DB

The Delhi High Court struck down NHAI's recruitment criterion relying solely on CLAT (PG) scores for legal posts as arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Article 14 Article 16 Recruitment criteria CLAT (PG) score

Prahalad & Ors. v. Union of India

24 Sep 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:8559
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal holding that death during boarding/deboarding constitutes an untoward incident under Section 124A of the Railways Act, entitling compensation to the dependents despite alleged contributory negligence.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 Railways Act, 1989 Section 124A untoward incident

Parveen Kumar Bansal & Anr. v. Ashwani Kumar & Anr.

24 Sep 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:8528

The Delhi High Court restrained the MCD from executing a demolition order until the appeal pending before the non-functional Appellate Tribunal MCD is heard.

administrative other supervisory jurisdiction Appellate Tribunal MCD demolition order stay application

Ajit Singh & Ors. v. Kanta Devi

24 Sep 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:8534

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that delay in filing suit cannot be condoned under Section 5 Limitation Act and time spent before Revenue Authorities cannot be excluded under Section 14(2) as the proceedings were not prosecuted in good faith or related to the same matter in issue.

civil appeal_dismissed Limitation Act, 1963 Section 5 Limitation Act Section 14(2) Limitation Act condonation of delay

SMT SUMEDHA CHOPRA v. SHRI SHITAL KUMAR BHANDARI & ANR.

24 Sep 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:8542

The court held that it can rectify its inadvertent procedural error and restore a suit under its inherent powers despite the expiry of limitation for review or appeal, ensuring no party suffers due to the court’s mistake.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 151 CPC inherent power rectification of court error limitation

Rohtas Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

24 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8488-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld disciplinary proceedings against an Additional SHO for negligence in controlling illicit liquor sale, ruling that reliance on preliminary enquiry material is permissible if procedural safeguards are met.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant preliminary enquiry departmental enquiry Delhi Police Rules 1980 natural justice

Prabhu Dayal v. CP & Ors.

24 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8493-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a police constable following a valid departmental enquiry for extortion, affirming limited judicial review and compliance with procedural requirements under Delhi Police Rules.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant departmental enquiry Rule 15(2) Delhi Police Rules prior approval corruption charge

Amjad Khan v. The Chairman, Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board

24 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8502-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition directing appointment of an OBC candidate whose certificate was issued after the cut-off date due to administrative delay, emphasizing substantive justice over procedural technicalities.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant OBC certificate cut-off date reservation Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board

Jitender Kumar & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

24 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:8552

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties in a matrimonial dispute, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Prince v. State NCT of Delhi

24 Sep 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:8570

The Delhi High Court acquitted appellants convicted for throwing boiling oil due to failure of prosecution to prove their identity and common intention beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_allowed identity of accused common intention contradictory evidence injured witnesses

Madhur Confectioners Private Limited v. Shree Renuka Sugars Ltd

23 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8541-DB

The Delhi High Court restrained the respondent from using the mark "MADHUR" for confectionary items during the suit while permitting its use for sugar, recognizing class-specific trademark rights and allowing coexistence.

civil appeal_allowed trademark infringement interim injunction Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC class-specific trademark rights

Naveen Nishok Kumar v. Harish Kumar

23 Sep 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:8439-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a registered relinquishment deed, dismissed unregistered cancellation attempts, and held that claims barred under the Benami Act require clear fiduciary relationship evidence.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Relinquishment Deed Deed of Cancellation Registration Act 1908 Benami Transactions Act 1988

Narender Rana & Ors. v. State & Ors.

23 Sep 2025 · Nitin Wasudeo Sambre; Anish Dayal · 2025:DHC:9216-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition, holding that possession of land acquired for the Rohini Residential Scheme is deemed vested in the acquiring authority, precluding lapsing of acquisition under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, and reaffirmed the limited scope of review jurisdiction.

property petition_dismissed Significant land acquisition deemed possession Section 24(2) of 2013 Act review petition

Roopa Khanna v. Anil Varma & Ors.

23 Sep 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:8428-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the auction of a composite dwelling unit in execution of a partition decree, rejecting physical partition and estopping the appellant from withdrawing her accepted purchase offer.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant partition composite dwelling unit right of pre-emption Hindu Succession Act, 1956

Ozar Homes LLP v. Delhi Development Authority

23 Sep 2025 · The Chief Justice; Tushar Rao Gedela; Devendra Kumar Upadhya... · 2025:DHC:8441-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the highest bidder in a public auction does not acquire a vested right for acceptance of the bid, and the authority's decision to reject the bid based on valid commercial considerations without arbitrariness is not subject to judicial interference.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant public auction highest bidder vested right judicial review

Chand Mehra & Anr. v. British Airways PLC

23 Sep 2025 · The Chief Justice; Tushar Rao Gedela; Devendra Kumar Upadhya... · 2025:DHC:8427-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a dispute over refund of air tickets does not qualify as a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and upheld the return of plaint by the Commercial Court for lack of jurisdiction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant commercial dispute Commercial Courts Act, 2015 contract of carriage Order VII Rule 10 CPC

Patanjali Ayurved Limited v. Dabur India Limited

23 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8575-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld an injunction restraining disparaging references in advertisements while permitting comparative advertising using the term 'ordinary Chyawanprash' without direct or indirect reference to the competitor's product.

civil appeal_allowed Significant interim injunction disparaging advertisement comparative advertising Chyawanprash