Delhi High Court
29,725 judgments
Global Telecommunication Private Limited v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte GST adjudication order due to lack of proper notice and hearing, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication while leaving the validity of extension notifications open pending Supreme Court's decision.
The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 v. XIOCOM (NZ) Ltd
The Delhi High Court upheld that payments for software licenses under EULAs do not constitute taxable royalty under the Income Tax Act or Indo-New Zealand DTAA, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.
State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) v. Gaurang Kadyan
The Delhi High Court set aside the Sessions Court's discharge order and held that a false promise of marriage to induce sexual relations constitutes rape under Section 376 IPC, directing framing of charges against the accused.
Simmi Anand v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Section 138 NI Act, holding that the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption that the cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt.
Sachindra Priyadarshi v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld framing of charges for sexual assault despite prosecutrix's refusal of internal medical examination, discharging the accused only from the charge under Section 328 IPC for lack of prima facie evidence.
Parasram v. State NCT of Delhi
Bail was denied to an accused charged with kidnapping and aggravated penetrative sexual assault of minors due to the gravity of offences, consistent victim statements, and accused’s absconsion.
MS. XXXXXXXX v. State NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court set aside the discharge of accused in a rape and dowry case due to pending supplementary chargesheet and remanded for fresh consideration after all material is filed.
The State (GNCT of Delhi) v. Suraj
The High Court set aside the discharge of accused in a sexual offence case against a minor, holding that charges must be framed if material raises strong suspicion, especially considering the victim's age and trauma.
Paras Nath Jha v. Harjeet Singh
The High Court upheld the dismissal of the petitioner's application to recall the complainant under Section 311 Cr.P.C., holding that the power to recall witnesses must be exercised cautiously and the petitioner had ample opportunity to cross-examine earlier.
Dinesh Gupta v. HT Media Limited & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld summoning orders against a director under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, holding that specific averments and documentary evidence suffice to proceed at the summoning stage without quashing the complaint.
Amit Mittal v. Krishiv Poly Products LLP
The court held that a defendant who conceded limitation cannot have the plaint rejected on that ground, but may still raise limitation at final arguments despite defence being struck off.
Powergrid Corporation of India Ltd v. Ranjit Singh and Co. LLP
The Court examined whether a fresh claim is maintainable before the Arbitral Tribunal after an arbitral award was set aside for lack of evidence and arbitrariness, issuing notice and deferring proceedings pending further hearing.
Dilip Rawal v. M/S Mothers Pride Education Personna Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
The Delhi High Court restored a commercial suit dismissed for non-prosecution upon the plaintiff's assurance of future compliance and imposed costs for prior inaction.
M/S EMINENT INFRADEVELOPERS PVT LTD ANR v. BRIJ MOHAN SHARMA AND ANR
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order setting aside ex-parte decrees and allowing defendants to cross-examine the plaintiff's witness, emphasizing liberal exercise of discretion and fair trial principles.
Anil Kumar v. Swati & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the Trial Court to reconsider the substitution application in a succession certificate petition after giving due hearing, especially considering the status of minor petitioners.
Jasvinder Singh Sethi & Anr. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 135 of the Electricity Act following an amicable settlement, affirming the court's power to end criminal proceedings where continuation would be unjust.
Rohit Chaudhary & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 420, 120B, 467, 468, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, emphasizing the court's power under Section 528 BNSS to prevent abuse of process and serve the interest of justice.
Sasan Kumar v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 354, 354(D), 341, and 509 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, emphasizing the court's power under Section 528 BNSS 2023 to prevent abuse of process.
Mayank Bansal @ Jonty v. State G.N.C.T of Delhi
The Delhi High Court quashed a motor accident FIR and all proceedings based on an amicable settlement between the parties, emphasizing the court's power under Article 226 and Section 528 BNS to end criminal cases where continuation would be unjust.
Pranav Basoya v. State of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR and related criminal proceedings under Sections 509, 323, and 506 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, applying the principle that continuation of proceedings would be unfair and an abuse of process.