Delhi High Court
69,037 judgments
Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/S U.K.Paints (I) P.Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding CESTAT's order allowing refund claims under Rule 57F(3) and clarifying that CESTAT lacks jurisdiction over appeals involving exports without payment of duty under Section 35B(1)(b).
Saroj Aggarwal v. Nimish Singhania HUF
The Delhi High Court upheld an eviction order under the Delhi Rent Control Act, ruling that bona fide requirement includes family-controlled companies and tenants cannot raise new defenses not filed in leave to defend applications.
Prabhu Dayal Bajaj v. Narendra Kumar Bajaj
The Delhi High Court disposed of contempt petitions as satisfied after the respondent executed the conveyance deed and undertook payment to the petitioners as directed.
R P Malhan & Company v. Sanjeev Srivastava & Ors
The Delhi High Court disposed of contempt petitions as infructuous upon respondents' fresh undertaking to pay the petitioners, allowing further proceedings if the undertaking is breached.
Gyan Ganga Shiksha Samithi v. Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board & Anr
The Delhi High Court directed the welfare department to conduct a proper enquiry into site suitability and local objections before directing DUSIB to construct Chaupals, emphasizing consultation and procedural fairness in administrative welfare projects.
U.P. Purva Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd v. Brijesh Kumar Pandey & Anr
The High Court set aside gratuity award orders lacking reasoned findings and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act.
Rakesh Kumar Meena v. State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a non-compoundable FIR under Sections 354(A) and 354(D) IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.
State of Tamil Nadu v. Union of India and Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of a charge sheet issued by the State of Tamil Nadu against an IPS officer deputed to the CBI, holding that the State lacked jurisdiction after deputation and that the charge sheet was issued with mala fide intent.
Satish Kumar Gupta v. Union of India and Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by an India Government Mint employee at Noida for lack of territorial jurisdiction, directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate court in Uttar Pradesh.
Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation-3, Delhi v. Formula One World Championship Ltd.
The Delhi High Court emphasized limited judicial interference in international tax assessments, upholding the statutory framework and principles of natural justice, referring to a detailed connected judgment for substantive directions.
Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Kamal Dev Singh & Ors.
The Delhi High Court remanded the compensation claim for fresh determination of whether the deceased died due to an accident involving the insured vehicle or an unknown vehicle and directed IRDA to clarify insurance liability under the Employees’ Compensation Act.
ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court set aside the trial court's order returning plaints for lack of territorial jurisdiction in loan recovery suits, holding that the suits were maintainable in Delhi courts under Section 20 CPC and that the Supreme Court decision on NI Act cases was not applicable.
ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction in loan recovery suits under Section 20 CPC includes all parts of the cause of action and set aside the trial court's order returning the plaint for lack of jurisdiction.
ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction in civil suits for loan recovery is governed by Section 20 CPC and set aside the trial court's order returning plaints for lack of jurisdiction based on a misapplication of a criminal law precedent.
ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction in loan recovery suits is governed by Section 20 CPC and set aside the trial court’s order returning plaints for lack of jurisdiction, directing the suits to proceed.
ICICI Bank Ltd v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that civil suits for loan recovery are maintainable in Delhi courts based on the cause of action, setting aside the trial court's order returning plaints for lack of territorial jurisdiction.
ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that civil suits for loan recovery can be tried by Delhi courts if part of the cause of action arises there, setting aside the trial court's order returning plaints for lack of territorial jurisdiction.
ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that civil suits for loan recovery can be tried in Delhi courts under Section 20 CPC despite disbursement through a dealer, setting aside the trial court's order returning the plaints for lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Pradeep Arora & Ors. v. Samantha Kochhar
The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award ordering refund of capital contribution to a retiring partner, holding that capital invested becomes partnership property and is recoverable only after rendition of accounts under the Indian Partnership Act.
Yashoda v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under the NDPS Act but reduced the sentence in light of the 2001 amendment, emphasizing compliance with Section 50 and the applicability of beneficial sentencing provisions.