Delhi High Court

77,044 judgments

Year:

Pardeep Singh Chib v. Director General, Sashastra Seema Bal & Anr.

12 Jul 2021 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw; Amit Bansal · 2021:DHC:2037-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking reinstatement after long delay and acceptance of dismissal, holding that parity with another reinstated employee does not apply without timely legal challenge.

service_law petition_dismissed Significant dismissal from service reinstatement parity of relief delay in challenging dismissal

Karan Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

12 Jul 2021 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw; Amit Bansal · 2021:DHC:2035-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging dismissal from BSF service for assault and insubordination, holding that procedural irregularities without prejudice and a guilty plea do not vitiate disciplinary proceedings.

criminal petition_dismissed Summary Security Force Court Border Security Force Act, 1968 disciplinary proceedings plea of guilty

Govind Swaroop Chaturvedi v. State of NCT of Delhi

12 Jul 2021 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2021:DHC:2026
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the eligibility criteria of the Advocates Welfare Scheme requiring Delhi voter ID cards, rejecting claims of discrimination against advocates residing outside Delhi but registered with the Bar Council of Delhi.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Chief Minister Advocates Welfare Scheme Bar Council of Delhi voter ID card condition advocates welfare

Govind Swaroop Chaturvedi v. State of NCT of Delhi

12 Jul 2021 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2021:DHC:2023
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the eligibility condition requiring advocates to have Delhi voter ID cards for benefits under the Chief Minister’s Advocates Welfare Scheme, affirming it as a valid policy classification and declining to extend benefits to advocates residing outside Delhi without such voter ID.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Chief Minister’s Advocates Welfare Scheme Bar Council of Delhi voter ID card condition advocates welfare

M/S Jyoti Sarup Mittal v. The Executive Engineer-XXIII, South Delhi Municipal Corporation

12 Jul 2021 · Vibhu Bahkru · 2021:DHC:2028
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the arbitration agreement exists and appointed an independent arbitrator, ruling that the clause restricting appointment solely to the Commissioner, MCD is ineffective under the amended Arbitration Act and Supreme Court precedents.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 Section 12(5) Appointment of arbitrator

Govind Swaroop Chaturvedi v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

12 Jul 2021 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2021:DHC:2024
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the eligibility condition requiring advocates to have Delhi voter ID cards for benefits under the Chief Minister’s Advocates Welfare Scheme, allowing reopening of registration but denying extension to non-resident advocates.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Chief Minister’s Advocates Welfare Scheme Bar Council of Delhi voter ID card condition advocates welfare

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. M/S BHAWANI PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD.

12 Jul 2021 · Manmohan; Navin Chawla · 2021:DHC:2030-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeals, upholding the ITAT's order that adjusted commission income estimation on accommodation entries based on evidence and precedent, finding no legal infirmity.

tax appeal_dismissed Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Accommodation entries Commission income estimation Burden of proof

Intertek India Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

12 Jul 2021 · Manmohan; Navin Chawla · 2021:DHC:2032-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Income Tax Department to dispose of the petitioner's rectification application and issue the refund within four weeks, affirming the statutory mandate under Section 154(8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

tax appeal_allowed Income Tax Act 1961 Section 154(8) rectification application computation mistakes

Naresh Kumar Goyal v. National Faceless Assessment Centre & Ors.

12 Jul 2021 · Manmohan; Navin Chawla · 2021:DHC:2031-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside a faceless income tax assessment order for failure to grant a requested personal hearing, emphasizing the statutory obligation to consider such requests under Section 144B(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

tax appeal_allowed Significant faceless assessment personal hearing Income Tax Act 1961 Section 144B

Govind Swaroop Chaturvedi v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

12 Jul 2021 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2021:DHC:2025
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of the voter ID card condition in the Chief Minister’s Advocates Welfare Scheme, limiting benefits to advocates registered voters in Delhi, and declined to extend the Scheme to advocates residing outside Delhi.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Chief Minister’s Advocates Welfare Scheme Bar Council of Delhi voter ID card condition advocates welfare

Govind Swaroop Chaturvedi v. State of NCT of Delhi

12 Jul 2021 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2021:DHC:2022

The Delhi High Court upheld the voter ID eligibility condition in the Advocates Welfare Scheme as a valid policy decision but allowed extension of insurance benefits to all eligible advocates enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi, including those residing in the NCR region.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Chief Minister’s Advocates Welfare Scheme Bar Council of Delhi voter ID card eligibility advocates welfare

Baljit Fantu v. State, Govt of NCT Delhi & Anr

12 Jul 2021 · Subramonium Prasad · 2021:DHC:2033

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 25 of the Arms Act against a petitioner found with a single live cartridge, holding that prosecution requires proof of conscious possession which was absent here.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Arms Act Section 25 Arms Act ammunition definition conscious possession

Khandelwal Edible Oils Limited v. Landsmill Agro Private Limited

12 Jul 2021 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:9330
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the defendant's use of the mark "CHAKRA KOLHU" infringes the plaintiff's registered trademark "CHAKRA" and copyright in its label, granting permanent injunction against such use while dismissing claims against other marks.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Copyright infringement Likelihood of confusion Descriptive mark

Syed Ahmar Ali Hashmi v. Union Public Service Commission & Ors.

11 Jul 2021 · Rajiv Shakdher; Talwant Singh · 2021:DHC:2436-DB

Delhi High Court held that contractual employees are entitled to age relaxation under Government OM for recruitment in the same department, directing UPSC to consider such relaxation despite Recruitment Rules.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant age relaxation contractual employees Government of NCT of Delhi Office Memorandum 11.06.2019

Food Corporation of India Handling Workers Union v. Union of India

09 Jul 2021 · Rajiv Shakdher; Talwant Singh · 2021:DHC:2006-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 10

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging transfer orders as withdrawn, allowing the petitioner-union to approach the Gauhati High Court with interim relief extended for ten days.

administrative appeal_dismissed writ petition transfer orders withdrawal of petition territorial jurisdiction

Jitarani Udgata v. Union of India & Anr.

09 Jul 2021 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2021:DHC:2016
Cites 0 · Cited by 13

The Delhi High Court held that the Gem and Jewellery Export Promotional Council is not a State instrumentality under Article 12, and writ jurisdiction under Article 226 does not lie against it for employment termination disputes.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Article 12 Constitution Article 226 Constitution State instrumentality Writ jurisdiction

M/S National Collateral Management Services Limited v. Jagdamba Ricemill & Anr.

09 Jul 2021 · C. Hari Shankar · 2021:DHC:2017

The Delhi High Court held that an arbitration clause granting exclusive appointment rights to one party is invalid and appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to resolve the dispute.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration clause exclusive appointment Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Section 11(5) Arbitration Act

Tata Consultancy Services Limited v. Kings Canyon SEZ Pvt Ltd

09 Jul 2021 · C. Hari Shankar · 2021:DHC:2010

The Delhi High Court appointed the agreed arbitrator to resolve disputes between TCS and Kings Canyon SEZ Pvt. Ltd., directing the arbitrator to treat Section 9 petitions as Section 17 applications and dispose of them expeditiously.

civil other Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 9 Section 12(2) Section 17

Chirag Paswan & Anr. v. Lok Sabha Secretary and Ors.

09 Jul 2021 · Rekha Palli, J · 2021:DHC:2008

The Delhi High Court upheld the Speaker's recognition of a new party leader chosen by the majority of the legislature party under the Tenth Schedule, dismissing the petition challenging the substitution as an internal party dispute beyond judicial interference.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant legislature party original political party Tenth Schedule party leader

Central Board of Trustees EPF Organisation v. B2R Technologies Pvt

09 Jul 2021 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2021:DHC:2018
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court upheld the CGIT order setting aside damages under Section 14B of the EPF Act due to absence of mens rea for delayed provident fund deposits by the respondent company.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Section 14B EPF Act damages mens rea delayed provident fund deposit