Delhi High Court

29,725 judgments

Year:

Krishna Caters v. Union of India & Ors.

11 Sep 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:8004

Delhi High Court granted a seven-month extension of a catering license at Prayagraj Railway Station, affirming its jurisdiction and applying prior precedents on dies non periods and license extensions.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant license extension dies non period territorial jurisdiction Article 226

Mania Ghai v. Nishant Chander

11 Sep 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:7890-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Family Court's dismissal of a wife's suit for equal ownership of property purchased in the husband's name, holding that mere homemaking contributions do not confer proprietary rights absent financial contribution or joint title.

family appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC cause of action homemaker contribution property rights

Waseem Ahmed v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

11 Sep 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:7995

The Delhi High Court granted interim protection against demolition to the petitioner, directing timely filing of an appeal before the ATMCD despite the absence of a Presiding Officer, without expressing any opinion on the merits.

administrative petition_allowed Procedural Demolition Order Interim Protection Appellate Tribunal Municipal Corporation of Delhi Unauthorized Construction

Nitish Dabas & Ors. v. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi & Anr.

11 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:7983

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 354, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and divorce between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.

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

Dinesh Kumar Verma v. Ramesh Ghai

11 Sep 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:7976

The High Court upheld the trial court's refusal to allow replication after commencement of evidence, emphasizing that replication is not a statutory right and trial courts must ensure time-bound disposal.

civil appeal_dismissed replication Civil Procedure Code time-bound disposal trial court discretion

Dr. Arun Narula v. U.S. Bal & Anr.

11 Sep 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:7954

The High Court upheld the trial court's order allowing respondents to lead rebuttal evidence by summoning witnesses, emphasizing the court's discretionary power under CPC to ensure fair trial.

civil appeal_dismissed rebuttal evidence summoning witnesses Section 151 CPC Order XX Rule 12 CPC

Navin M. Raheja & Anr. v. Dinesh Goyal & Ors.

11 Sep 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:7986

The Delhi High Court held that a Bench of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission comprising only Technical Members is valid under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and its orders are not null and void for lack of a Judicial Member.

civil petition_dismissed Significant National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bench composition Judicial Member Technical Member

Durgesh @ Durga v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

11 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:7944
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted bail to an accomplice in a murder case due to prolonged pre-trial detention violating the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, balancing the gravity of the offence with fundamental liberty rights.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail right to speedy trial Article 21 accomplice liability

Vishan Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi

11 Sep 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:7946

The Delhi High Court dismissed bail to the accused in a premeditated murder case, holding that credible evidence and gravity of offence outweigh prolonged pre-trial detention concerns.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail premeditated murder eyewitness testimony ballistic report

Saint Gobain Glass France v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs & Anr.

11 Sep 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:7941

Delhi High Court upheld refusal of patent application for lack of inventive step, emphasizing the necessity of technical advancement and proper application of the five-step test without impermissible mosaicing of prior art.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant inventive step patent refusal mosaicing prior art person skilled in the art

Pragati Power Corporation Ltd. v. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited

10 Sep 2025 · Jyoti Singh · 2025:DHC:8396
Cites 2 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11 stage, the court must appoint an arbitrator upon prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement, relegating disputes over liability denial and arbitrability to the arbitral tribunal.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arbitrability insurance claim repudiation Industrial All Risk policy

Dwarika Prasad v. UOI & Ors.

10 Sep 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Vimal Kumar Yadav · 2025:DHC:8296-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a BSF Head Constable for facilitating cattle smuggling, holding that the disciplinary proceedings were lawful and Rule 46 of the BSF Rules was not violated.

administrative petition_dismissed Border Security Force Rules Rule 46 BSF Rules Summary Security Force Court disciplinary proceedings

Sanjay Pandey v. Lalita

10 Sep 2025 · Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:8282
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of a tenant on the landlord's bona fide requirement and superior documentary title, dismissing unsubstantiated oral ownership claims.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) bona fide requirement landlord tenant relationship

Satish Kumar v. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board

10 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8119-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition of a candidate unlawfully excluded from appointment by directing creation of a supernumerary post to accommodate him despite revised cut-off marks, balancing fairness and merit.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant eligibility for appointment cut-off marks supernumerary post administrative tribunal

Union of India v. N.K. Nagar

10 Sep 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:8115-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the Union of India's appeal, holding that the respondent's belated challenge to his accepted resignation was barred by limitation and acquiescence, setting aside the Tribunal's reinstatement order.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant resignation acceptance acquiescence estoppel delay condonation

SI MIN Mrityunjay Kumar Singh v. Union of India

10 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:8058-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed the dismissal of a BSF personnel for failure to record reasons when dispensing with a mandatory disciplinary inquiry, ordering reinstatement with continuity of service.

administrative petition_allowed Significant General Security Force Court Disciplinary Authority BSF Act 1968 Rule 22(3) BSF Rules 1969

Union of India v. IC-25491M LT COL V.G. Kulkarni

10 Sep 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025 SCC OnLine SC 895
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union of India's petition and upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of disability pension for Essential Hypertension, affirming the presumption that disabilities not present at entry are service-related unless proven otherwise.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Essential Hypertension Armed Forces Tribunal Release Medical Board

M/S MONEYWISE FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT LTD v. GRAINTEX EXPORTS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.

10 Sep 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:8189

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 to adjudicate the disputes, validating service by email and WhatsApp.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 11 Arbitration Act prima facie examination arbitration agreement service by email and WhatsApp

Simla Holdings v. The Assistant Commissioner Central Tax Division

10 Sep 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:7959-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to file a belated appeal against a GST demand order after recalling its earlier judgment, emphasizing proper service under Section 169 CGST Act and the availability of statutory remedies.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Input Tax Credit Service of order Section 169 CGST Act Limitation period

Jugesh Kumar v. Omwati through LRs

10 Sep 2025 · Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:8128

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of a tenant under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, affirming the landlord’s bona fide requirement and rejecting tenant’s challenge for leave to defend.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) eviction petition bona fide requirement