Delhi High Court

58,104 judgments

Year:
Showing 2024 — 8501 judgments found

Shri Inderjit Walia & Anr. v. Dr. Amitabh Parti & Anr.

12 Mar 2024 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:6236

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to resolve a lease deed dispute, affirming the arbitration clause specifying New Delhi as the seat and rejecting an unproven oral agreement to change it.

civil petition_allowed arbitration clause Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act appointment of arbitrator seat of arbitration

Kinshuk Goel prop. M/s Ganesha International v. Ministry of Defence, Government of India

12 Mar 2024 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:6826
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that limitation objections cannot be raised at the Section 11(6) stage and appointed an arbitrator to resolve disputes under a Supply Order arbitration clause, leaving all substantive issues to the arbitral tribunal.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 12(5) Appointment of arbitrator

M/S ROHAN BOOK COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA

11 Mar 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:1980-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court set aside orders disposing Show Cause Notices solely for non-submission of reply and remitted the matter for re-adjudication after granting the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.

administrative appeal_allowed Show Cause Notice natural justice opportunity to be heard Goods and Service Tax Act

M/S MAURYA INDUSTRIES v. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR

11 Mar 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:1984-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court held that GST registration cancellation with retrospective effect must be based on objective satisfaction and proper procedure, modifying the cancellation date to the petitioner's voluntary application date.

tax appeal_allowed Significant GST registration cancellation Section 29(2) CGST Act retrospective cancellation Show Cause Notice

Manoj Diwakar v. Union of India and Anr.

11 Mar 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:1979-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 72

The Delhi High Court set aside defective GST adjudication orders lacking reasoning and directed fresh adjudication after affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing and to file supplementary replies.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Show Cause Notice Scrutiny Notice Goods and Services Tax non-application of mind

Commissioner of Central Excise v. Kuber Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd.

11 Mar 2024 · Yashwant Varma; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:1959-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the CESTAT majority order dismissing excise duty demands and penalties against Kuber Tobacco for lack of credible evidence of clandestine removal, emphasizing the preponderance of probabilities standard and the need for corroborated proof.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant clandestine removal central excise duty preponderance of probabilities Section 14 statement

Pushpa Devi v. Pawan Sehrawat

11 Mar 2024 · Shalinder Kaur · 2024:DHC:1950

The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court's discretion to recall an order closing defence evidence under Section 151 CPC, emphasizing circumspect use of inherent powers and dismissing the petition challenging the same.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 151 CPC inherent powers recall of order closing of evidence

Sudhir Power Project Ltd. v. Prime Meiden Pvt. Ltd.

11 Mar 2024 · Shalinder Kaur · 2024:DHC:1939

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to place a belatedly discovered relevant document on record under Order VIII Rule 1A(3) CPC but refused to admit an affidavit of admission/denial at the evidence stage, emphasizing the balance between procedural rules and substantial justice.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VIII Rule 1A(3) CPC additional documents affidavit of admission/denial liquidated damages

Nitin Kataria v. Varun Jain

11 Mar 2024 · Shalinder Kaur · 2024:DHC:1935

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court’s order striking off the defendant’s defence for failure to file a timely and compliant written statement in a commercial suit, dismissing the petition challenging the same.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VIII Rule 1 CPC written statement condonation of delay Commercial Courts Act

Santosh Bhasin v. Umari Malhotra Decd Thr Lrs

11 Mar 2024 · Anup Jairam Bhambhani · 2024:DHC:1976

The Delhi High Court held that its judgment declaring equal shares in property is a preliminary decree of partition and directed appointment of a commissioner to effectuate physical division, allowing consequential relief under Section 151 CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant partition suit preliminary decree final decree Order 20 Rule 18 CPC

Ananya Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

11 Mar 2024 · Acting Chief Justice Manmohan; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2024:DHC:2115-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the Delhi Police appropriately register cybercrime FIRs under the IT Act and IPC as per the Supreme Court's guidance, dismissing the PIL seeking mandatory exclusive registration under the IT Act.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Information Technology Act, 2000 Cybercrime FIR registration Delhi Police

GM Modular Pvt Ltd v. Mayur Electromeck Pvt Ltd and Anr.

11 Mar 2024 · Sanjeev Narula · 2024:DHC:2411

The Delhi High Court cancelled the respondent’s trademark registration for deceptive similarity and non-use, affirming the petitioner’s prior rights in the GM trademarks.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement deceptive similarity prior use non-use cancellation

Trisquare Switchgears Pvt Ltd v. Sh Sanyam Kaushik

11 Mar 2024 · Rajiv Shakdher; Amit Bansal · 2024:DHC:2490-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's decree for recovery of payment for goods supplied, holding that the court had territorial jurisdiction and the defense of poor quality goods was unsubstantiated.

civil appeal_dismissed territorial jurisdiction cause of action contractual jurisdiction clause quality of goods

M/S AMBA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED v. CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION

11 Mar 2024 · Anup Jairam Bhambhani · 2024:DHC:2634

The Delhi High Court held that a Section 11 arbitration petition filed within statutory limitation and after bona fide pursuit of remedy before NCLT is maintainable, rejecting contractual limitation clauses restricting arbitration invocation and referring the dispute to arbitration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 petition Limitation Act, 1963 Section 14 Limitation Act

M/S Shuban Sai Honda v. Rajesh Kumar

11 Mar 2024 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2024:DHC:2330

The Delhi High Court upheld the Labour Court's award holding the respondent's termination illegal due to lack of domestic inquiry and insufficient proof of misconduct, awarding compensation in lieu of reinstatement.

labor petition_dismissed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 domestic inquiry illegal termination workman definition

Prithvi Raj Singh & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

11 Mar 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:1967

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC in a matrimonial dispute following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuing proceedings would be an abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) – 1 v. M/S Moon Star Securities Trading & Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd.

11 Mar 2024 · Yashwant Varma; Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2024:DHC:2007-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that disallowances under Section 14A cannot be added back to book profits for Minimum Alternate Tax computation under Section 115JB, affirming that Section 115JB is a self-contained code with specific adjustments.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 14A Section 115JB Minimum Alternate Tax book profit

Neeraj @ Raymond Henry & Ors. v. The State & Anr.

11 Mar 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:1965
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce between the parties, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of the court process.

criminal petition_allowed Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute

Satender Kumar Yadav v. Union of India & Ors.

11 Mar 2024 · V. Kameswar Rao; Saurabh Banerjee · 2024:DHC:2160-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Indian Army's medical boards' decision declaring the petitioner medically unfit due to a hyperpigmented lesion and dismissed the petition challenging the rejection of a discretionary Review Medical Board.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant medical fitness Armed Forces recruitment Review Medical Board hyperpigmentation lesion

Suresh Kumar Jain v. Sales Tax Officer Class II Avato & Anr.

11 Mar 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:2002-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside a tax demand order under Section 73 of the CGST Act for failure to provide personal hearing and proper consideration of the taxpayer's detailed reply, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 73 CGST Act Show Cause Notice Input Tax Credit mismatch