Delhi High Court

33,441 judgments

Year:

Manjeet Kaur Duggal v. Income Tax Officer Ward 52 1 Delhi

29 May 2025 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:4644-DB

The Delhi High Court held that reassessment notice under Section 148 was barred by limitation as the escaped income did not exceed ₹50 lakhs, setting aside the notice and related orders for AY 2013-14.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 149(1)(b) Long Term Capital Gains

Richa Sureka v. Akhil Kumar Sureka

29 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:4775

The High Court dismissed a revision petition under Section 115 CPC challenging an interlocutory order as not maintainable, reaffirming that only orders finally disposing of proceedings are revisable.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 115 CPC revision petition interlocutory order final disposal

DJT RETAILERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED & ANR

29 May 2025 · Sachin Datta, J. · 2025:DHC:4891

The Delhi High Court held that interlocutory arbitral orders under Section 16 of the Arbitration Act are not ordinarily subject to writ jurisdiction and that MSMED Act protections apply only when a party invokes the Facilitation Council, dismissing the petition challenging the arbitrator's jurisdictional order.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 16 Section 34 MSMED Act

M/S SCHINDLER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. PARNIKA COMMERCIAL AND ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.

29 May 2025 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:4899

The Delhi High Court held that an unconditional bank guarantee can be invoked on demand without examining underlying disputes, dismissing the petition restraining invocation and leaving contractual disputes to arbitration.

civil petition_dismissed Significant bank guarantee advance bank guarantee performance bank guarantee invocation

Jyoti Jain & Anr. v. RK Stockholding Pvt Ltd

29 May 2025 · Girish Kathpalia

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking quashing of complaint cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, allowing petitioners to withdraw and face trial, reaffirming that such matters are to be decided at trial stage.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act quashing petition dishonor of cheque pre-trial quashing

Mohit @ Rohit v. The State of NCT of Delhi

29 May 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:4623

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in a stabbing case involving simple injuries, imposing conditions to prevent contact with prosecution witnesses.

criminal appeal_allowed regular bail simple injuries fit of rage non-contact condition

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -1 v. Amazon Web Services, Inc

29 May 2025 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:4622-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that payments received by Amazon Web Services, Inc. for cloud computing services are not taxable as royalty or fees for technical services under the Income Tax Act or India-US DTAA, affirming the Tribunal’s order dismissing the Revenue’s appeals.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant cloud computing services royalty fees for technical services India-US DTAA

Lummus Novolen Technology GmbH v. The Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs

29 May 2025 · Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:4614

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against the rejection of a patent application for lack of inventive step, holding the claimed Ziegler-Natta catalyst process obvious in light of prior art under Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act, 1970.

intellectual_property appeal_dismissed Significant inventive step patent application Ziegler-Natta catalyst Section 2(1)(ja) Patents Act

Jasmit Singh v. Omkara Transport Private Limited & Ors.

29 May 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:4718

The Delhi High Court allowed a belated written statement in a commercial suit subject to exemplary costs, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural timelines and discouraging casual litigation conduct.

civil petition_allowed Order VIII Rule 10 CPC written statement commercial suit delay in filing

Ajit Chauhan v. High Court of Delhi

29 May 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:4598-DB

The Delhi High Court held that candidates promoted during administrative delays in conducting a two-part departmental examination cannot be disqualified from the subsequent part based on their changed pay level, affirming eligibility as of the earlier stage.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Common Assistant Accounts Officer Examination Eligibility criteria Pay Level 7 Administrative delay

Sanjeev Kumar v. Union of India and Others

29 May 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:4601-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the classification of a naval sailor's transfer as compassionate ground, rejecting retrospective reclassification to service requirement despite medical and family grounds, emphasizing adherence to Navy transfer policy and limited judicial interference in executive policy decisions.

service_law petition_dismissed Significant transfer classification compassionate ground service requirement Navy Order 07/2020

Rama Kant Sharma Udbhrant v. Union of India and Another

29 May 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:4599-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of post-retirement disciplinary proceedings against a retired Doordarshan officer, dismissing his challenge to the penalty of withholding 20% pension for procedural and substantive infirmities.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings Rule 9 CCS Pension Rules post-retirement inquiry withholding pension

Comptroller and Auditor General of India v. Amit Yadav & Anr.

29 May 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:4597-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside the CAT order directing medical assessment for appointment of a PwBD candidate to a post not identified as suitable for his disability at the time of recruitment, holding that retrospective application of a later notification was impermissible and administrative discretion on post suitability cannot be judicially overruled.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 mental illness disability SSC CGLE 2018 post suitability

Sanjeev Kumar Chhatwal v. Pawan Kumar Bharara

29 May 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:4600-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the plaintiff's ownership and possession decree, rejected the defendant's tenancy claim due to lack of specific proof, disallowed additional evidence at appeal, and reduced mesne profits awarded.

civil appeal_allowed Significant tenancy possession mesne profits Delhi Rent Control Act

Sh Rishabh Kumar Anand v. Atul Gupta

29 May 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:4711

The High Court allowed the petition directing the acceptance of a belated written statement despite a delayed condonation application, relying on the Supreme Court's ruling against a hyper-technical approach.

civil appeal_allowed Significant written statement condonation of delay commercial suit procedure

Delhi Development Authority v. Late Shri Bhikha Ram through LRs & Anr.

29 May 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:4712

The Court allowed DDA to file a written statement and lead evidence during a de novo hearing in a long-pending land acquisition case after being impleaded in the appeal.

property petition_allowed Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 4 written statement de novo hearing

Narinder Kaur Bhatia v. Ramma Dhawan

29 May 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:4715

The Delhi High Court directed the trial court to expedite an 18-year-old civil suit by prioritizing the case and completing the trial within one year of framing issues.

civil other delay in trial expeditious trial framing of issues constitutional court intervention

Ram Chandra Rathi v. Madhu Bansal

29 May 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:4721

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner one final opportunity to cross-examine a witness in a commercial suit, imposing costs to ensure fairness and prevent delay.

civil other cross-examination commercial suit trial procedure costs

The Ritz Hotel Limited & Ors. v. M S Hotel Ritz & Ors.

29 May 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:4725

The Delhi High Court declared the plaintiffs’ RITZ and RITZ-CARLTON marks as well-known trademarks and granted permanent injunctions restraining the defendants from using infringing marks and domain names.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant well-known trademark Trade Marks Act, 1999 RITZ trademark RITZ-CARLTON trademark

Prakash Goswami v. State of NCT of Delhi

29 May 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:4737

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking transfer of a criminal appeal, holding that absence of certain documents not filed with the charge sheet does not justify transfer or adjournment when adequate opportunity was provided during trial.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 482 Cr.P.C. transfer petition missing documents charge sheet