Delhi High Court

70,895 judgments

Year:

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8 v. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.

26 Feb 2006 · Yashwant Varma; Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2024:DHC:5082-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 7

The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's decision that royalty payments made by Samsung India Electronics to its parent for technological know-how were at arm's length and not subject to transfer pricing adjustments, rejecting the Revenue's claim that the payments were to itself as a contract manufacturer.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant transfer pricing arm's length price royalty payments contract manufacturer

Mukesh Kapil v. Parag P Tripathi & Ors.

07 Feb 2006 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:6196-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld a consent decree based on a settlement agreement in a property redevelopment dispute, dismissing challenges alleging fraud and invalidity, and clarified that agreements to sell do not transfer ownership until registered sale deeds are executed.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Settlement Agreement Consent Decree Collaboration Agreement Agreement to Sell

Mukesh Kapil v. Parag P Tripathi & Ors.

07 Feb 2006 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:6198-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld a consent decree based on a settlement agreement in a property redevelopment dispute, rejecting challenges of fraud and invalidity and directing execution of sale deeds as per agreed terms.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Settlement Agreement Consent Decree Collaboration Agreement Agreement to Sell

Mukesh Kapil v. Parag P Tripathi & Ors.

07 Feb 2006 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:6197-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld a consent decree based on a settlement agreement in a property redevelopment dispute, holding that agreements to sell do not create interest in property until registered sale deeds are executed and dismissing challenges based on alleged fraud and breach.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant consent decree settlement agreement collaboration agreement agreement to sell

Ram Phal v. Union of India & Ors.

01 Jan 2006 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:5502-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that pre-2006 pensioners are entitled to pension fixation as per the 6th CPC recommendations without arbitrary cut-off restrictions, quashing the denial of upgradation benefits and directing revision with arrears.

service_pension petition_allowed Significant pension fixation pre-2006 pensioners 6th Central Pay Commission Office Memorandum

SI (GD) Hanumant Singh Shekhawat v. Union of India

01 Jan 2006 · S. Muralidhar; Sanjeev Narula · 2018:DHC:9011-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 7

The Delhi High Court held that CRPF Sub-Inspectors are entitled to pay fixation at Rs. 10,230 plus grade pay of Rs. 4,200 under the ACP Scheme by applying the 1.86 multiplier, directing respondents to grant consequential benefits.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Assured Career Progression Scheme ACP Scheme Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 pay fixation

Rani Singh v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

23 Dec 2005 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:5041-DB
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a police officer absconding after criminal charges, ruling that family pension is not payable despite presumed death after seven years, as dismissal without enquiry was valid and pension rights forfeited.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant family pension dismissal from service absconding departmental enquiry

KTM-AG v. Honda Motorcycles and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

22 Dec 2005 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:8769

The Delhi High Court disposed of the trademark dispute petition as settled and directed cancellation of the "DUKE" trademark registration in accordance with the parties' Settlement Agreement.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Settlement Agreement Trademark cancellation Trade Mark Registry DUKE trademark

Mr. Chatanya Siddhartha, Advocate. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

01 Nov 2005 · JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA; 25.01.2019 SANJ... · 2019:DHC:7933-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 11

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act once possession is taken and compensation paid, dismissing stale claims of continued possession by landowners.

property petition_dismissed Significant land acquisition Section 24(2) 2013 Act possession compensation

Ram Kawar HUF v. M/S SMC GLOBAL SECURITIES LIMITED

08 Sep 2005 · Navin Chawla · 2024:DHC:1837

The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court's refusal to summon irrelevant documents under Section 91 Cr.P.C. in a Section 138 NI Act complaint, emphasizing that such power cannot be used for fishing expeditions or to delay trial.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 91 Cr.P.C. Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act summoning of documents cross-examination

Ashok Kumar v. Mona

19 Aug 2005 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2016:DHC:6533-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the divorce petition for cruelty and mental unsoundness due to the appellant's failure to prove specific incidents or produce medical evidence establishing incurable mental disorder.

family appeal_dismissed Significant Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 13(1)(ia) Section 13(1)(iii) cruelty

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Ajay Bhatia

17 Aug 2005 · Anu Malhotra · 2021:DHC:3792
Cites 1 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court dismissed appeals challenging execution orders on grounds of inaccurate site plan, holding that the decree's finality bars re-agitation of property identity issues in execution proceedings.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Execution of decree Site plan accuracy Section 47 CPC Order XXI Rule 97 CPC

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) v. M/S Jamnalal Bajaj Foundation

25 May 2005 · Yashwant Varma; Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2024:DHC:4536-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 11

The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's decision allowing a charitable trust to claim exemption on deemed income arising from temporary donations to other charitable trusts under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 11 Income Tax Act accumulated income deemed income charitable trusts

M/S RAMA TENT HOUSE v. Sh. Inderjeet and Anr.

20 May 2005 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2021:DHC:1197

The Delhi High Court upheld Labour Court awards granting compensation to workmen retrenched by Rama Tent House, affirming the employer-employee relationship and continuous service under the Industrial Disputes Act.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant employer-employee relationship Industrial Disputes Act 1947 continuous service retrenchment

Meera Goyal v. Priti Saraf

04 May 2005 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:8640
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award awarding ₹38 crores to the buyer, holding that the seller's failure to fulfill contractual conditions novated payment obligations and that the arbitration proceedings and award were valid and not liable to be set aside.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Agreement to Sell Compulsory Requirements

Union Public Service Commission v. Mukesh Kumar Rohilla & Ors.

04 Jan 2005 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:512-DB

The Delhi High Court remitted a selection dispute to the Central Administrative Tribunal for reconsideration in light of a prior circular fixing interview cut-off marks, emphasizing procedural fairness and expeditious disposal.

administrative other Procedural Union Public Service Commission Central Administrative Tribunal minimum cut-off marks interview selection criteria

Ramesh Kumar Sehgal v. Canara Bank

27 Nov 2004 · Jyoti Singh · 2023:DHC:1870

The Delhi High Court held that compulsory retirement imposed as a penalty entitles a bank officer to leave encashment under Regulation 38, rejecting delay objections and directing payment with interest.

service_law petition_allowed Significant compulsory retirement leave encashment Regulation 38 Canara Bank Officers Service Regulations

National Highway Authority of India v. MS Jas Toll Road Company Ltd

18 Oct 2004 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:5388

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award granting extension of the concession period to Jas Toll Road Company Ltd. due to force majeure events and revenue losses under the Concession Agreement with NHAI.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Concession Agreement Force Majeure Extension of Concession Period Toll Collection

Sewak Balkishan Gupta v. The State

19 Aug 2004 · I. S. Mehta · 2017:DHC:7422

The Delhi High Court upheld the framing of charges in a criminal conspiracy and forgery case, ruling that limitation for cognizance restarts from the Supreme Court's restoration of the quashed FIR.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant limitation period cognizance framing of charge Section 482 CrPC

Sewak Balkishan Gupta v. The State

19 Aug 2004 · I. S. Mehta · 2017:DHC:7421

The Delhi High Court upheld the framing of charges in a criminal conspiracy and forgery case, ruling that limitation restarts upon Supreme Court restoration of a quashed FIR and delay alone does not warrant quashing proceedings.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant limitation period cognizance charge framing Section 482 CrPC