Delhi High Court
99,566 judgments
M/S Delhi Clean Tech Services Pvt Ltd v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation
The Delhi High Court granted a six-month extension for the sole arbitrator to conclude arbitral proceedings and deliver the award, with no objection from the respondent.
A. Loganathan v. Union of India & Ors.; Gurcharan Singh v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking interim relief against discharge orders on medical grounds, holding that absence of irreparable loss and adverse impact on military discipline preclude stay of discharge pending Armed Forces Tribunal adjudication.
Ishrat Jahan v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the extension of investigation period under section 43-D of UAPA in a complex riot conspiracy case, affirming the Court’s discretion to grant such extension upon satisfaction with the prosecution’s report and progress of investigation.
Iqbal Singh v. State
The Delhi High Court granted bail to the petitioner holding that medicinal cough syrup containing codeine below prescribed thresholds does not constitute a narcotic drug under the NDPS Act, distinguishing it from illicit drug mixtures.
Marwah Construction Private Limited v. Official Liquidator
The Delhi High Court allowed the Official Liquidator’s petition and ordered dissolution of Marwah Construction Private Limited following compliance with statutory liquidation procedures under the Companies Act, 1956.
Anjum Jahan Sheikh & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
Delhi High Court directs government authorities to consider and decide contractual nurses' representation for contract renewal within three weeks, granting limited relief by writ of mandamus.
Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. Nayara Energy Limited
The Delhi High Court granted a joint request to extend the time for the Arbitral Tribunal to conclude arbitration proceedings and make an award under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
HYOSUNG CORPORATION v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
The Delhi High Court directed the Income Tax authority to dispose of the petitioner's rectification application within six weeks and pay any refund due with interest, emphasizing timely disposal under the Income Tax Act and CBDT Circular.
HYOSUNG CORPORATION v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
The Delhi High Court directed the income tax authority to dispose of the petitioner’s pending rectification application within six weeks and pay any refund due, emphasizing the statutory obligation under Section 154(8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Hyosung Corporation v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the income tax authority to comply with the CIT(A) order and release the refund with interest within six weeks, enforcing statutory obligations under the Income Tax Act.
Dr. Machat Balakrishnan Menon v. Medical Council Committee & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted interim protection to a medical postgraduate admission pending verification of alleged discrepancies in the candidate’s counselling registration form and directed authorities to clarify the admission process.
HYOSUNG CORPORATION v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
The Delhi High Court directed the income tax authority to decide the petitioner’s pending rectification application within six weeks and pay any refund due with interest, emphasizing the statutory mandate for timely disposal under the Income Tax Act.
Dr. Pranay Nijhawan v. National Board of Examinations & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that a candidate who freezes his DNB seat by paying fees as per counselling rules cannot participate in subsequent rounds despite a last-minute extension of the payment deadline.
Royale Blue Club Private Ltd. v. OYO Hotels and Homes Private Ltd.
The Delhi High Court granted interim possession relief but referred all substantive monetary and other claims to the Sole Arbitrator under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.
Royale Blue Club Private Ltd v. OYO Hotels and Homes Private Ltd
The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 after parties failed to mutually agree, enabling arbitration proceedings to commence.
Dev J Roy v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL challenging the temporary upgradation and appointment of the Custodian, holding no violation of Article 14 or principles of judicial hierarchy.
M/S Intercorp Industries Ltd. & Ors. v. Registrar of Companies
The High Court quashed the summoning and framing of notice orders against M/s Intercorp Industries Ltd. for non-application of mind due to absence of supporting documents on record, emphasizing the necessity of judicial scrutiny at the initial stage of criminal proceedings.
Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. FEPL Engineering (P) Limited & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that the 75% pre-deposit under Section 19 of the MSME Act includes both principal and interest components of an arbitral award and directed the petitioner to deposit the interest portion while allowing partial release of the pre-deposit to the respondent on furnishing security.
Vinay Vats v. Fox Star Studios India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's interim injunction application against the film "Lootcase," holding that mere similarity in plot ideas does not constitute copyright infringement and criticizing the plaintiff's last-minute approach.
Mahua Bindal and Ors. v. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld GGSIPU's policy of reserving 50% State Quota postgraduate medical seats for its own MBBS graduates by Institutional Preference, dismissing challenges based on Article 14 and lack of State Government policy, relying on binding Supreme Court precedents.