Delhi High Court

33,081 judgments

Year:

Mursid Alam & Ors. v. The State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

30 May 2025 · Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:4719

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A/34 IPC based on a voluntary amicable settlement between the parties, promoting peace and harmony in matrimonial disputes.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 498A IPC quashing of FIR Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita matrimonial dispute

Pawan Kumar & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

30 May 2025 · Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:4717

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce between the parties.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 528 BNSS 2023 Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC

Vishal and Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

30 May 2025 · Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:4713

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 509, and 34 IPC following an amicable mediation settlement between the parties, emphasizing the court's power to promote peace through quashing criminal proceedings in matrimonial disputes.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC mediation settlement Article 227 Constitution

Dr. Kapil Kalaswa v. State (GNCT of Delhi) and Anr

30 May 2025 · Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:4653

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to a doctor accused of sexual assault, holding that completed investigation and charge-sheet filing with clean antecedents favor bail despite serious allegations.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant regular bail sexual assault consensual relationship honey trapping

Ankit Bisht @ Nikki v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

30 May 2025 · Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:4671

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's bail application in a serious attempt to murder case, holding that parity with co-accused does not entitle bail when the petitioner’s role is graver and trial is underway.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant bail parity attempt to murder gunshot injury

Dalip Singh v. Durga Prasad Sharma & Anr

30 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju, J. · 2025:DHC:4975
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition challenging an eviction order, reaffirming that title disputes cannot be adjudicated in eviction proceedings and must be decided in civil suits.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Eviction Petition Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Title dispute Civil suit

Rajender Mittal v. Union of India; State of Delhi

30 May 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:4922

The Delhi High Court upheld consecutive default sentences totaling 182 years under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, ruling that such sentences in civil execution proceedings cannot run concurrently and dismissed the writ petition challenging the order.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 27 CP Act Execution proceedings Consecutive sentences

Shahzad Khan and Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

30 May 2025 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ; Tushar Rao Gedela, J · 2025:DHC:4916-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of residents claiming protection under the PM-UDAY Scheme for unauthorized constructions in the ecologically sensitive Yamuna flood plains, upholding demolition orders and emphasizing public purpose and zoning regulations.

property appeal_dismissed Significant unauthorized colonies PM-UDAY Scheme Zone O Yamuna flood plains

Om Prakash Sunil Kumar v. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

30 May 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:4639-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and held that the insured retained insurable interest and was entitled to indemnification under the marine cargo policy despite mid-transit sale, as the declaration was proper and no route diversion occurred.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Marine Cargo Open Policy Insurable Interest Insurance Claim Non-Disclosure

Sanjay Kaul v. The Income Tax Officer Ward 24 (4), New Delhi & Ors.

30 May 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:4660-DB

The Delhi High Court held that reopening a concluded income tax assessment requires tangible material with a direct nexus to escapement of income, and set aside a reopening notice issued on general investigation reports lacking specific evidence against the petitioner.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 147 Income Tax Act reopening of assessment reason to believe tangible material

Piccadily Hotels Private Limited v. Ashish Rathi

30 May 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:4656-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's decree for recovery of outstanding payment, holding that unsubstantiated allegations of forged invoices and inferior goods cannot defeat a claim supported by primary business records.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant burden of proof forgery fabrication commercial dispute

SK SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. AND ANR v. RAVI KANT CHANDHOK

30 May 2025 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:4657-DB

In absence of a written mandate, a claimant must prove the quantum of professional fees with cogent evidence; unilateral invoicing without substantiation cannot sustain a decree, leading to modification of the decree to a reasonable assessed amount.

civil appeal_allowed Significant professional fees recovery written agreement quantum of fees commercial courts

Quazar Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. National Agricultural Coop. Marketing Federation of India Ltd.

30 May 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:4655-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging an arbitral award on additional payment claims under a lump sum contract, holding that judicial interference is limited and no patent illegality was shown.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act Section 37 Arbitration and Conciliation Act Lump sum contract

M/S R.K. Enterprises v. Canara Bank

30 May 2025 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:4654-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's decree for loan recovery against a sole proprietorship, affirming the admissibility of electronic evidence under Section 65B without oral testimony of the certificate issuer.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 65B Indian Evidence Act electronic evidence sole proprietorship Order XXX Rule 10 CPC

HOME AND INDL INTERNATIONAL COATINGS v. ARROWSHELF RETAIL FIXTURES

30 May 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:4658-DB

The Delhi High Court held that failure to initially produce partnership registration documents is a curable defect but dismissed the suit as the Appellant failed to prove that Deltrol and Arrowshelf are the same firm, thereby upholding the Trial Court's dismissal of the claim against Respondents.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Partnership Act 1932 Section 69 Order XXX Rule 1 CPC partnership firm registration

Yogender Kumar Gupta v. Arun Kumar Gupta

30 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:4887
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

Revision petition challenging an interlocutory order is not maintainable under Section 115 CPC and is barred by limitation if filed late without condonation.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 115 CPC revision petition interlocutory order limitation

Madhu Gupta v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others

30 May 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:4867

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking removal of unauthorized construction due to abuse of process, emphasizing advocates' duty to prevent misuse of judicial proceedings and imposing costs on petitioner and counsel.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant writ petition unauthorized construction abuse of process public interest litigation

Sushma Kumari Jain & Ors. v. Commissioner of Customs

30 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:4839-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that used personal jewellery carried by passengers is exempt from customs duty and must be released if detained without proper procedure.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant personal effects used jewellery Baggage Rules 2016 customs duty exemption

Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-1 v. A.H. Multisoft Pvt. Ltd.

30 May 2025 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:4686-DB

The High Court upheld the ITAT's acceptance of the Assessee's expert valuation of shares under Section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, dismissing the Revenue's appeal challenging the rejection of AO's book value-based valuation.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 56(2)(viib) Fair Market Value Discounted Cash Flow Income Tax Act, 1961

M/S Mahavir Metal House v. Additional Commissioner, CGST, Delhi North

30 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:4835-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging CGST demands for fraudulent ITC, holding that statutory appeal remedies must be exhausted before writ intervention.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Input Tax Credit CGST Act Section 107 writ jurisdiction