Delhi High Court

29,725 judgments

Year:

Badrunnisa Khan v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8316-DB

The Delhi High Court directed verification of the claim of a second wife for family pension despite non-disclosure under CCS (Conduct) Rules, emphasizing procedural fairness before granting or denying pension.

administrative other Significant family pension second wife Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 Rule 21

Birander Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8315-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a government servant can withdraw a notice of voluntary retirement before its effective date upon valid reasons and competent authority approval, quashing the refusal to allow such withdrawal despite an undertaking not to withdraw.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant voluntary retirement withdrawal of retirement notice Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules Rule 43(6)

Mohammad Zaman v. Union of India

17 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8283-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition as withdrawn on the petitioner's request without adjudicating on the merits.

constitutional other Procedural writ petition withdrawal disposal High Court of Delhi

Airports Authority of India v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8275-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging rejection of transitional CENVAT credit, directing the petitioner to pursue statutory appeal with supporting documents under the CGST Act.

tax petition_dismissed Significant CENVAT Credit Transitional Credit Section 140 CGST Act ST-3 Return

M/S SAAKAR INDIA v. THE COMMISSIONER OF DELHI GOODS AND SERVICES TAX

17 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8274-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside a GST demand order passed without hearing the petitioner, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication while leaving the validity of the impugned notifications to the Supreme Court.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Goods and Services Tax Section 168A GST Act Show Cause Notice Natural Justice

Express House Keeper (P) Ltd. v. Ensol Power (P) Ltd.

17 Sep 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:8363

The Delhi High Court allowed restoration of a petition and disposed it as settled following an amicable settlement between the parties involving payment of Rs. 7,00,000/-.

civil settled petition restoration amicable settlement withdrawal of petition banker's cheque

Rahul Tyagi v. Kamlesh and Ors.

17 Sep 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:8365
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The High Court held that revision under Section 115 CPC is not maintainable against interlocutory orders that do not finally dispose of the suit, dismissing the petition accordingly.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 115 CPC revision petition interlocutory order final order

Vipin v. State GNCT of Delhi

17 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:8345

The Delhi High Court granted four weeks parole to a life convict due to undue delay by authorities in deciding his parole application and his satisfactory conduct and family circumstances.

criminal petition_allowed Significant parole prison rules judicial custody delay in decision

Ramanathan Advocates v. Directorate of Enforcement

17 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:8346

The Delhi High Court held that immunity under Section 32A IBC protects a successful Resolution Applicant from criminal proceedings against the corporate debtor prior to insolvency resolution, directing the trial court to consider this immunity before proceeding.

criminal other Significant Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code Section 32A IBC Clean Slate Doctrine Resolution Plan

Anil Kumar Goel v. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax- Delhi 10 and Ors.

17 Sep 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar · 2025:DHC:8392-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Income Tax Department to pay the petitioner refund with statutory interest within eight weeks and allowed representation for any dispute over the amount.

tax petition_allowed refund statutory interest penal interest Income Tax Act 1961

Pawan Kumar v. The Commissioner of Customs

17 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8375-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that detention of goods without issuance of a valid Show Cause Notice within six months under the Customs Act is unlawful, invalidated oral waivers by pre-printed forms, and ordered release of seized goods subject to payment of duties.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Show Cause Notice Customs Act 1962 oral waiver personal hearing

Kumar Kaurav v. Rohit Bhatia & Bhawana Bhatia

17 Sep 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:8437

The court granted conditional leave to defend a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC, holding that defendants raising genuine triable issues and partial admission of debt are entitled to defend subject to furnishing security.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XXXVII CPC leave to defend summary suit substantial defence

M/S Aggarwal Kirana Stores v. Govt of NCT of Delhi

17 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8373-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte GST adjudication order for failure to afford hearing, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication subject to the Supreme Court's decision on the validity of related notifications.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Show Cause Notice Natural Justice Section 168A GST Act Notification validity

Balwinder Singh Vig v. Commissioner of Customs

17 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8366-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court directed release of a detained gold kada worn as personal religious jewellery on payment of redemption fine, upheld penalty, and waived warehousing charges due to Customs Department delay in implementing appellate orders.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs Act, 1962 Baggage Rules, 2016 personal effects gold kada

Dr Sunil Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Sep 2025 · Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:8429
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner’s contempt petition for non-compliance with the one-year limitation period and failure to establish wilful disobedience, holding that distinct orders cannot be challenged together and affidavits of compliance negate contempt.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant contempt of court wilful disobedience limitation period Section 20 Contempt Act

M/S DK Enterprises v. Union of India

17 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:8369-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging a GST order on fraudulent ITC, holding that natural justice was not violated and the petitioner must pursue statutory appellate remedies under the CGST Act.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Input Tax Credit fraudulent ITC show cause notice natural justice

Neetu Bhagat v. All India Council for Technical Education

17 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8384-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

Deputation service against a regular post must be counted as regular service for promotion eligibility, and the DoP&T OM on seniority does not exclude such service from qualifying for promotion.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant deputation service regular service promotion eligibility seniority

National Insurance Company Limited v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Sep 2025 · Sachin Datta · 2025:DHC:8474

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the NGRC order for lack of jurisdiction, directing the petitioner to approach the Patna High Court based on the doctrine of forum conveniens.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant jurisdiction forum conveniens Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana National Grievance Redressal Committee

Vikas Gupta v. Union of India & Ors

17 Sep 2025 · Prateek Jalan · 2025:DHC:8228

The Delhi High Court held that an employee appointed with five advance increments as part of basic pay is entitled to pay fixation under revised scales by applying increments on the revised minimum pay, directing MMTC to revise the petitioner’s pay accordingly.

labor appeal_allowed Significant pay fixation advance increments revised pay scale Persons with Disability

Ramesh Chawla v. State

17 Sep 2025 · Sanjeev Narula

The High Court upheld the dismissal of a complaint against police officers for lack of prior sanction and limitation, affirming that prosecution of public servants requires mandatory sanction under Sections 140 Delhi Police Act and 195 and 197 CrPC.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 140 Delhi Police Act Section 195 CrPC Section 197 CrPC prior sanction