Delhi High Court
69,037 judgments
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-II v. Satkar Fincap Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that a clear satisfaction note by the Assessing Officer fulfills the requirement under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, setting aside the ITAT's quashing of the assessment and remitting the matter for merits consideration.
Ajay Kumar Mann v. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd.
An employee cannot be denied seniority and promotion benefits solely due to a pending FIR without suspension, chargesheet, or prosecution, as per the Government of India circular dated 8.1.2003.
Subhash Chandra v. Punjab National Bank
The Delhi High Court dismissed a delayed writ petition challenging non-promotion and performance appraisal, holding that delay bars relief and reservation circulars for government employees do not apply to bank employees without policy.
Archna Dev v. Raj
The Delhi High Court allowed the appellant extension to vacate suit premises on condition of payment of arrears and continued use and occupation charges, disposing of the appeal by mutual settlement.
Bank of India v. Ajit Pal Singh Bindra
The Delhi High Court disposed of the appeal by consent, directing the appellant bank to vacate the premises by a specified date and continue paying use and occupation charges pending suit resolution.
Veena Rawat v. Devki Devi Rawat & Anr
The Delhi High Court disposed of the matrimonial appeal by allowing the parties' settlement for mutual consent divorce, permitting interim occupation of the matrimonial home until the second motion petition is filed.
Jaspal Singh v. The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court disposed of Criminal Revision Petition No. 162/2016 in terms of a detailed common judgment delivered on the same day in a related petition.
Rajbir Singh v. UOI & Ors.
The Delhi High Court remanded a disciplinary service dismissal case to the Tribunal for fresh merits hearing, holding that punishment cannot be enhanced on a mere representation and limitation plea was waived.
Mohd Naser Packeer v. National Investigation Agency
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's bail appeal, holding that a valid extension of investigation under the UA(P) Act precludes statutory bail under Section 167(2) CrPC.
Gammon India Limited & Anr v. National Highways Authority of India
Delhi High Court allowed partial challenge to arbitral award, holding that subsequent legislation entitles excise duty reimbursement and upheld other contract claims on BOQ interpretation and compensation for delays.
Ramesh Chandra & Ors. v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed three criminal miscellaneous petitions for non-prosecution due to the absence of petitioners' counsel.
Anant Agency v. Commissioner, Trade & Taxes & Anr.
The Delhi High Court directed the tax authorities to remit refund amounts with interest to petitioners within one week and allowed petitions for timely compliance with VAT and trade tax refund claims.
Architects Bureau v. Delhi Agricultural Market Board & Anr
The Delhi High Court made the arbitration award a rule of the court and directed 10% interest from the award date till payment due to non-prosecution by Respondents.
Laxmi Gupta & Ors v. State of Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed anticipatory bail applications in a serious sexual assault case involving a minor, emphasizing the gravity of offences under the POCSO Act and the petitioners' subsequent conduct.
Dr. Mohd. Ahmed Ansari v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging denial of higher pay scales and arrears, holding that the petitioner was entitled only to promotions and pay fixation under the applicable 1999 office order and not the 1992 order applicable to a different cadre.
Ram Kumar @ Gouda & Anr. v. State of NCT of New Delhi
The Delhi High Court set aside convictions under Sections 366/376 IPC due to inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's testimony, questionable age evidence, and absence of corroboration, holding the conviction unsafe.
Anil Kumar Jain v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as compensation was unpaid and lawful possession was not taken.
Murari Lal v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that non-payment of compensation for over five years under the 1894 Land Acquisition Act results in lapse of acquisition under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, allowing the petitioners' writ petition.
Delhi Transport Corporation v. M/S Rose Advertising Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed the suit for recovery of money as barred by limitation, holding that requests for clarification do not amount to acknowledgment extending limitation.
Randhir Singh v. Lt. Governor of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, regardless of possession.