Delhi High Court
59,687 judgments
Chaturbhuj Rathore v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that recovery of excess pay-scale benefits from a retired Group-A employee without issuing a show-cause notice is impermissible, directing refund of recovered amounts while denying future benefits due to non-completion of mandatory training.
Commissioner of Income Tax-TDS-01 v. Diamond Tree
The Delhi High Court held that Common Area Maintenance charges are liable for TDS under Section 194C and not Section 194I of the Income Tax Act, dismissing the Revenue's appeals and upholding the ITAT's order in favor of the assessee.
Divya Sood v. Commissioner State Goods and Services Tax & Anr.
The Delhi High Court remanded GST adjudication orders for fresh hearing after the petitioner was denied opportunity to reply, while leaving open the validity of extension notifications pending Supreme Court decision.
KBS Industries Limited v. The Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax & Ors.
The Delhi High Court set aside a non-speaking GST adjudication order and remanded the matter for fresh hearing after affording the petitioner an opportunity to file replies, while leaving the validity of the impugned notifications open pending Supreme Court decision.
M/S TRANS v. GOODS AND SERVICE TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND TAXES
The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte GST adjudication order due to defective notice communication on the GST portal and remanded the matter for fresh hearing, leaving the validity of related notifications open pending Supreme Court review.
Rajesh Kumar and Ors v. Union of India and Ors
The Delhi High Court disposed of writ petitions as the petitioners had been repatriated, rendering the petitions infructuous and not maintainable.
Meena v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in an NDPS case holding that intermediate quantity recovery and procedural lapses justified bail despite the prosecution's claim of commercial quantity and organized syndicate involvement.
MMTC LIMITED v. ANGLO-AMERICAN METALLURGICAL PTY LIMITED
The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal against an interlocutory order as infructuous after the main suit was dismissed during the appeal's pendency.
Harish Chandra Singh Negi v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking restoration of seniority for non-impleadment of necessary parties, reaffirming that all affected persons must be joined in seniority disputes.
Deepak Dhankar v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to decide the petitioner’s appeal against rejection of disability pension within four weeks by passing a reasoned and speaking order.
Cdr. Annie Nagaraja v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn on the petitioner’s request without expressing any opinion on the merits.
Sarfraz Ahmad v. The Vice Chancellor, JMI and Ors.
The Delhi High Court set aside the termination of an Assistant Professor by Jamia Millia Islamia University for failure to comply with natural justice and statutory procedural requirements, directing a fresh decision after serving the inquiry report and hearing the petitioner.
Rajan Sethi v. Sajan Sethi
The Delhi High Court allowed videography of disputed property by Local Commissioner, dismissing the petition as not pressed, while emphasizing adherence to prior final judgments.
Jagdish Chander & Ors. v. Satyam Kumar Sharma
The court held that a mediation settlement and decree bind only signatory parties and not non-signatories who did not participate, dismissing the petition challenging the Executing Court's order limiting liability to respective shares.
Mohd. Saleem v. Tanveer Alam
The High Court declined to interfere under Article 227 with the Trial Court's interlocutory order and directed the petitioner to challenge it by appeal after decree.
Rahul Garg v. Wasim Ahemad @ Mohd Wasim & Ors
The High Court allowed amendment of the plaint to include a prayer for specific performance, directing the Trial Court to decide limitation as a separate issue.
Ashish Jain & Ors. v. State of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuing prosecution would be an abuse of process of law.
Sh. Yogender & Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and related IPC provisions following an amicable settlement and mutual divorce, emphasizing the Court's power to end criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process.
Rajesh Kumar & Others v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, holding that continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law.
Devesh & Anr. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, emphasizing the Court's power to end criminal proceedings in the interest of justice.