Delhi High Court
65,687 judgments
Satpal v. The Chief Secretary Govt of National Capital Territory of Delhi & Ors.
Delhi High Court directed DSIIDC to verify the appellant's proprietorship and allot the cancelled industrial plot or an alternative plot after cancellation of fraudulent allotment to a third party.
Orion Security Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. University of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that mere registration of an FIR without conviction cannot disqualify a tender bid and directed the University of Delhi to evaluate the petitioner’s bid in accordance with the tender conditions.
Jubilant Securities Pvt Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax
The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's refusal to condone delay in filing cross-objections under Section 14A, holding that acceptance of the CIT(A) order without timely appeal results in finality barring reopening of the issue.
Suresh Kumar Malhotra & Ors. v. Gujral Estates Pvt. Ltd.
Damages in suits for specific performance must be assessed based on loss at the date of breach under Section 73 of the Contract Act, and amendments to enhance damages based on property value at judgment date are impermissible.
Karamveer @ Sonu v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence of the appellant for murdering his wife, applying Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act to reject his alibi and affirm his responsibility.
Sarita Handa v. UOI & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that retrospective amendments to Sections 28 and 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are unconstitutional and must be treated as prospective, quashing related demands and administrative circulars.
Sarita Handa v. UOI & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held retrospective amendments to Sections 28 and 80HHC of the Income Tax Act unconstitutional and quashed related tax demands and circulars, affirming their prospective operation only.
Sarita Handa v. UOI & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that retrospective amendments to Sections 28 and 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and related CBDT Circular are unconstitutional and must be treated as prospective, quashing demands based on them.
Utkarsh Apparels & Anr. v. Winnosme Textiles Industries Ltd & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against an arbitration award, holding that objections filed beyond the three-month limitation period under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, without sufficient cause for delay, are barred and not liable to be condoned.
Shilendra Ghai v. Shakuntala Ghai
The Delhi High Court held that a family settlement clause expressing posthumous distribution of assets does not restrict a party's right to deal with their property during their lifetime and dismissed the petitioner's appeal seeking injunction against sale of his mother's property.
Bhuwan Chandra Upadhyay v. Border Security Force
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging termination of a BSF Polytechnic employee for misappropriation of fees, holding that the disciplinary procedure under the BSF Education Code was properly followed and the termination was justified.
UltraTech Cement Limited v. Jaiprakash Associates Limited & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that the Escrow Agreement remained effective despite non-fulfillment of a condition subsequent within one month, and respondent No.1 was entitled to invoke bank guarantees and seek release of escrowed funds, dismissing the petition for injunction.
Sarvesh Security Service Pvt. Ltd. v. University of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that mere criminal charges do not disqualify a bidder in a tender process and directed the University of Delhi to reconsider the petitioner's tender on its merits.
Prem Prakash Sethi and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr.
The Delhi High Court allowed directors of a struck-off company to avail the CODS-2018 Scheme benefits pending revival proceedings before the NCLT, staying their disqualification under the Companies Act, 2013.
Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Limited v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court directed the authorities to pass a speaking and reasoned order on the petitioners' claim under the Incremental Export Incentivization Scheme in compliance with Section 9(4) of the Foreign Trade Act, ensuring administrative transparency.
Naba Naeem & Anr v. Anees Ahmed Abbasi
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal in a suit for specific performance, permitting amendment of parties and fresh evidence despite procedural delays, emphasizing substantive justice over procedural technicalities.
Desh Raj v. Vidya Devi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court disposed of a property partition appeal as settled after parties agreed on a monetary compensation for the plaintiff's share, emphasizing consideration of post-judgment settlements in partition disputes.
Parivesh Kumar v. Union of India & Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging cancellation of Air Force recruitment candidature due to a non-permissible permanent tattoo and failure to comply with advertisement requirements.
Commissioner of Income Tax DEL v. M/s Hind Nihon Proteins P. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's finding that commission payments made by the assessee to related partnership firms were genuine business expenditures and not perverse, dismissing the Revenue's appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act.
Commissioner of Income Tax DEL v. M/s Hind Nihon Proteins P. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's finding that commission payments to related partnership firms were genuine business expenses, dismissing the Revenue's appeal for lack of perversity in the factual findings.