Delhi High Court

59,406 judgments

Year:

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

Suresh v. State NCT of Delhi

16 Sep 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:8173

The Delhi High Court dismissed bail to a habitual offender charged with attempted murder and arms offences, emphasizing the gravity of the charges and criminal history over delay and discrepancies in investigation.

criminal appeal_dismissed bail Section 307 IPC Arms Act criminal record

Amit Rajak v. The State of NCT of Delhi

16 Sep 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:8165

The Delhi High Court upheld the decision to try a nearly 18-year-old accused as an adult for heinous sexual offences against a minor, holding that the juvenile justice board's delayed but thorough preliminary assessment validly established his mental capacity and maturity.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant juvenile justice preliminary assessment mental capacity heinous offence

NOUAM FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. v. THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI)

16 Sep 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:8171

The High Court held that the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act applies and disputed questions about the cheque being a security or discharge of debt must be decided at trial, dismissing the petition to quash proceedings under Section 138.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 139 NI Act presumption quashing of complaint security cheque

Novartis AG v. Controller of Patents and Designs & Anr.

16 Sep 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petitions, holding that the petitioner waived its right to cross-examine opponent’s experts by not seeking it at the earliest stage and that denial of belated cross-examination does not violate natural justice.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant post-grant opposition cross-examination patent validity rebuttal evidence

Hemant Kumar Goyal alias Harish Goyal trading as Goyal Traders v. Yashwant Jain trading as Jain Traders

16 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:7803-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside an interim order granting trademark infringement and passing off relief due to contradictory findings and lack of prima facie goodwill, remitting the matter for fresh consideration.

civil appeal_allowed Procedural trademark infringement passing off interim injunction Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC

Ajay Kumar Garg v. Amit Kumar & Anr.

16 Sep 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:8823

The High Court upheld the trial court's dismissal of the petitioner's application to reject the plaint, holding that the plaint disclosed a cause of action and that Delhi courts had territorial jurisdiction as part of the cause of action arose there.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC cause of action territorial jurisdiction Section 20(c) CPC

Pradeep @ Vikram @ Vicky v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

16 Sep 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Vimal Kumar Yadav · 2025:DHC:8711-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the appellant's murder conviction under Section 302 IPC due to insufficient proof of intention and cause of death, substituting it with conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant murder culpable homicide Section 302 IPC Section 304 Part II IPC

BS v. State (NCT of Delhi)

16 Sep 2025 · Sanjeev Narula · 2025:DHC:8647
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and 20-year sentence of a father for aggravated sexual assault of his minor daughter, affirming the sufficiency of corroborated victim testimony and DNA evidence, and validating trial court's sentencing discretion under pre-amendment POCSO.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant sexual assault POCSO Act DNA profiling child victim testimony

Sushila Bhatnagar v. Union of India

16 Sep 2025 · Nitin Wasudeo Sambre; Anish Dayal · 2025:DHC:8582-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking enhanced compensation and rehabilitation benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 due to inordinate delay and failure to comply with statutory time limits for reference under Section 18.

property petition_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 18 reference enhanced compensation delay and laches

Moneywise Financial Services Pvt Ltd v. Muskan Engineering & Ors.

16 Sep 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:8547
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, the court's role is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 Appointment of Arbitrator Prima facie examination