Delhi High Court
29,725 judgments
Jagdish Chander v. All India Institute of Medical Sciences
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and refused to condone the inordinate delay, holding that the appellant was a fixed-term employee not entitled to regularization and that limitation law must be strictly enforced.
Commissioner of Service Tax v. M/S KONARK EXIM PVT. LTD.
The Delhi High Court held that appeals involving taxability or valuation questions decided by CESTAT lie exclusively to the Supreme Court under Section 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and dismissed the appeals as not maintainable before the High Court.
Tata Capital Limited v. Krishna Kumar
The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that the Court’s role is limited to a prima facie examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement.
CREST DIGITEL PRIVATE LIMITED v. DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED & ANR.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging DMRC's nomination of Indus Towers for IBS services, holding that non-exclusive license agreements and urgent infrastructure needs justify direct engagement without competitive bidding.
Hari Bhoomi Communications Private Limited v. Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax Delhi
The Delhi High Court set aside a GST adjudication order passed without effective communication of notices on the GST portal, remanding the matter for fresh hearing after proper notice.
MS Trehan International Consultants and Engineers Pvt Ltd v. The Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax
The Delhi High Court set aside the GST adjudication order for lack of proper notice and remanded the matter for fresh hearing, leaving the validity of extension notifications pending before the Supreme Court.
Sonaram Bagadaram Mali v. The Commissioner of Custom & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging provisional release of seized goods, holding that factual disputes require investigation and statutory remedies must be exhausted.
Neeraj Bhanupratap Singh v. Additional Commissioner of Customs (Export)
The Delhi High Court held that the amended definition of 'exporter' including 'beneficial owner' applies to the petitioner and directed him to pursue the statutory appellate remedy before the Commissioner (Appeals), dismissing the writ petition.
Sumit Panwar v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Others
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition of a candidate seeking belated relief in a recruitment challenge, holding that abandonment of claim and delay barred reopening the matter after relief was granted to timely petitioners.
Aditya Jha v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking a Review Medical Board after concurrent findings of unfitness by the Special and Appeal Medical Boards in recruitment medical examination.
Flt. Lt Deeksha Shukla (Retd) v. Union of India Ministry of Defence & Anr
The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a service matter under the Air Force Act, directing the petitioner to approach the Armed Forces Tribunal instead.
CASIO INDIA CO. PRIVATE LIMITED v. M/S ANIL RAI ELECTRONICS ENTERPRISES PVT. LIMITED
The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that the Court's role is limited to a prima facie examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement without delving into arbitrability or validity issues.
Tata Capital Limited v. Anil Kumar Saxena & Anr.
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act after prima facie finding an arbitration agreement and valid service by email, limiting judicial scrutiny to existence of the arbitration clause.
TATA CAPITAL LIMITED v. AVTAR SINGH & ANR.
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 after prima facie finding of an arbitration agreement and held that service by email is sufficient for arbitration proceedings.
M/S MONEYWISE FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD v. M/S KIRAN ENTERPRISES THROUGH ITS PARTNERS AND ORS
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act after prima facie finding an arbitration agreement, limiting judicial scrutiny to existence without addressing arbitrability or validity.
Delhi Development Authority v. Santosh Malik & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a suit for cancellation of a conveyance deed on grounds of fraud is barred by limitation if filed beyond three years from knowledge of fraud, and such plaint can be summarily rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
T.V. Today Network Limited v. Anurag Srivastava & Twitter Inc
Delhi High Court awarded Rs. 5 lakh general damages to TV Today Network for defamatory tweets by Anurag Srivastava, emphasizing discretionary assessment of reputational harm in defamation suits.
Mohd Adil Khan v. WTC Noida Development Company Pvt Ltd and Anr
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court's role is limited to prima facie satisfaction of the existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator accordingly.
Shakeel Ahmed v. WTC Noida Development Company Pvt. Ltd. and Anr
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that the Court’s role is limited to a prima facie examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement without delving into arbitrability or validity.
Tata Capital Limited v. Metroroadways Private Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 after prima facie finding of a valid arbitration agreement and held that service by email is sufficient.