Delhi High Court

29,725 judgments

Year:

Dobhal, Krishna Mohan Chandel, Hritwik Maurya, Mayank Kaushik and Aashrit Sukhija v. State NCT of Delhi

28 Aug 2025 · Arun Monga · 2025:DHC:7790

The Delhi High Court allowed condonation of a 930-day delay in filing a criminal revision petition, emphasizing parity with co-accused and a liberal approach to procedural delays under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant condonation of delay Section 5 Limitation Act revision petition parity principle

M/S JHA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ANR.

28 Aug 2025 · Jyoti Singh, J. · 2025:DHC:7766

The Delhi High Court held that contractors are entitled to interest on delayed payments beyond reasonable time limits despite contractual clauses excluding such interest, allowing a decree under Order XII Rule 6 CPC where principal liability is admitted.

civil appeal_allowed Significant interest on delayed payment Order XII Rule 6 CPC General Conditions of Contract reasonable time for payment

Asif Hamid Khan v. State & Shruti Bhardwaj

28 Aug 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:7773

The Delhi High Court upheld the magistrate's summoning order in a sexual harassment case, ruling that closure reports and departmental enquiry findings do not bar criminal proceedings when prima facie material exists.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Sexual Harassment POSH Act Closure Report Magistrate's Cognizance

Shail Shukla v. Delhi Development Authority

28 Aug 2025 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:7902

The Delhi High Court dismissed the DDA's review petition, holding that ownership of a flat in a multi-storeyed building must be assessed by proportionate land share for eligibility under the Rohini Scheme, and review jurisdiction is limited and not a substitute for appeal.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Review petition Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC DDA allotment Rohini Residential Scheme

M/S COLOR PALETTE PVT LTD v. M/S BULLMEN REALTY INDIA PVT LTD

28 Aug 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:7907
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the designation of New Delhi as the place of arbitration confers territorial jurisdiction on it under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act and appointed an arbitrator accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) jurisdiction place of arbitration

Janak Datwani v. Anand Datwani

28 Aug 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

The Delhi High Court dismissed the application to dismiss the suit based on an unproved Will and rejected the petition for transposition of parties in a representative suit, holding that enforceable rights require probate and clear admissions, and procedural requirements for representative suits must be complied with.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant registered Will legal representative Order XII Rule 6 CPC representative suit

Rakesh Babu v. Union of India & Ors.

28 Aug 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:7909-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of a BSF officer for aggravated penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act, affirming GSFC jurisdiction and rejecting procedural and factual challenges in a writ petition.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant POCSO Act jurisdiction General Security Force Court Sexual assault Section 29 POCSO presumption

Om Prakash v. I AND FC Department Govt. of NCT of Delhi

28 Aug 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:7841
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

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

other petition_allowed Significant arbitration agreement Section 11 Arbitration Act prima facie examination appointment of arbitrator

Uday Jain & Anr. v. Additional Commissioner Customs Air Cargo and Import & Anr.

28 Aug 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:7576-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the release of an imported artwork subject to ad-hoc deposits, recognizing the need for preservation and prima facie acceptance of declared origin and value pending full adjudication under the Customs Act.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Customs Act, 1962 Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 imported artwork country of origin

Rajbir Sharma v. Union of India & Ors.

28 Aug 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:7586-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a petitioner who obtained a valid NOC before joining a government undertaking is entitled to pro rata pension from the date of discharge from the Indian Air Force, subject to verification of the NOC.

administrative petition_allowed Significant pro rata pension Indian Air Force No Objection Certificate government undertaking

Dharambir Dhan v. Union of India

28 Aug 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:7449-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Departmental Promotion Committee's composite method of assessment for promotion, dismissing the petitioner's challenge for lack of mala fide or procedural irregularity.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Departmental Promotion Committee composite method promotion APAR

Kurlon Retail Limited v. Sales Tax Officer & Ors.

28 Aug 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Shail Jain · 2025:DHC:7571-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside a GST demand order passed without hearing the petitioner, granted opportunity to reply and be heard, and left the validity of extension notifications pending before the Supreme Court.

tax appeal_allowed Significant GST Act Section 168-A show cause notice Additional Notices Tab

Chahat Jain v. M/s Innocept Global & Ors.

28 Aug 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:7515

The Delhi High Court held that a sleeping partner is prima facie liable under Section 141 NI Act and an out-of-court settlement not recorded before the trial court does not quash a complaint under Section 138 NI Act.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 141 NI Act Sleeping partner liability Quashing of complaint

G.D. Soni DAV Sr. Secondary School v. Directorate of Education & Anr

28 Aug 2025 · Vikas Mahajan · 2025:DHC:7452
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that a government-aided school receiving only recurring maintenance grant can lawfully discontinue aid and convert to an unaided institution, and authorities cannot compel it to continue receiving aid against its wishes.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant government aid aided school unaided school Delhi School Education Act, 1973

RESCOM MINERAL TRADING FZE v. RASHTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED & ANR.

28 Aug 2025 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:7467
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

Delhi High Court dismissed petition seeking interim security under Section 9 Arbitration Act, holding financial distress alone insufficient without evidence of asset dissipation or mala fide intent.

commercial_arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration Act interim relief Order XXXVIII Rule 5 CPC prima facie case

M/S Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. v. State

28 Aug 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:7451
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court quashed the complaint against Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. for alleged manufacture of spurious drugs, holding that conflicting government test reports of sterling quality and procedural lapses vitiated the prosecution and no prima facie case was made out.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 Section 23 D&C Act Section 25 D&C Act framing of charge

Arun Kumar & Ors. v. State (NCT. of Delhi) & Anr.

28 Aug 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:7465

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC in a matrimonial dispute after the parties amicably settled all claims and the complainant withdrew prosecution.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute compromise

Bhoori Singh and Ors. v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

28 Aug 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:7454

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC Section 482 CrPC

Prakash Chand Sharma v. Union of India & Ors.

28 Aug 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:7429-DB
Cites 7 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a BSF officer for corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act, affirming limited judicial review in GSFC trials and admissibility of video evidence despite procedural challenges.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Border Security Force Act, 1968 General Security Force Court Section 65B Indian Evidence Act

Shri Arun Khosla & Ors. v. Shrimati Jyotsna Bhatia

28 Aug 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:7406-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a plaint cannot be summarily rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on limitation grounds where disputed facts exist regarding knowledge of registered Wills, emphasizing that such issues require trial.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC rejection of plaint limitation registered Will