Delhi High Court

35,876 judgments

Year:

Niladri Bhattacharya v. CPIO National Medical Commission & Ors.

13 May 2025 · Sachin Datta · 2025:DHC:3663

The Delhi High Court upheld the CIC's discretionary refusal to impose penalty on the CPIO under Section 20 of the RTI Act, holding no wilful concealment or malafide denial of information and rejecting the petitioner's challenge under Article 226.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Right to Information Act, 2005 Section 20 penalty Central Information Commission wilful concealment

M/S ORIENTAL SECURITY SERVICE v. NORTHERN RAILWAY (DELHI DIVISION) & ORS.

13 May 2025 · Sachin Datta · 2025:DHC:3659
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court set aside a five-year ban imposed on a security services firm by Indian Railways for non-submission of a reconstituted partnership deed at bid time, holding the penalty disproportionate and unjustified.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant partnership deed tender bid blacklisting ban

IIFL Home Finance Ltd v. Punkaj Bhagchand Chhallani & Ors.

13 May 2025 · Sachin Datta · 2025:DHC:3651

Delhi High Court dismissed petitions for appointment of arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act due to lack of territorial jurisdiction as the cause of action and respondents' residence were outside its jurisdiction.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 jurisdiction territorial jurisdiction seat of arbitration

Staff Selection Commission v. Deshbandhu

13 May 2025 · Navin Chawla; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:3700-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the CAT order due to inordinate delay and laches, reaffirming that unexplained delay can bar judicial relief even in writ proceedings.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant delay and laches writ petition Central Administrative Tribunal medical examination

Aktiebolaget Volvo & Ors. v. Mantis Technologies Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

13 May 2025 · Amit Bansal · ILR (2014) 2 Del 1288

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunctions, awarded damages, and ordered domain name transfers against defendants infringing the well-known 'VOLVO' trademark, decreeing the suit ex-parte due to defendants' default.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement passing off VOLVO trademark permanent injunction

RNR CAB SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. v. NHAI

13 May 2025 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2025:DHC:3892-DB

The Delhi High Court curtailed a three-month debarment imposed on a bidder for an inadvertent tendering error and directed the authority to consider the bidder’s subsequent H-1 bid, emphasizing proportionality and bona fide disclosure.

administrative petition_partly_allowed Significant debarment tender process abnormally high bid doctrine of proportionality

Mohd. Nizam v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Anr.

13 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3861-DB

The Delhi High Court directed authorities to regulate the unauthorized Saturday weekly market in New Ranjeet Nagar, balancing vendors' livelihood rights with residents' right to free movement, and ordered inquiry into illegal protection money collection.

administrative other Significant weekly market regulation unauthorized vending right to livelihood Article 19(1)(g)

Krishna Rani v. Sh Pradeep Kumar Pathak & Ors.

13 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:3847

Revision under Section 115 CPC is not maintainable against interlocutory orders that do not finally dispose of the suit, and such petitions must be dismissed.

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

SHRI HASNAIN ALI @ CHAMAN v. MOHD TASLEEM ANSARI AND ORS

13 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:3846

The High Court held that revision under Section 115 CPC is not maintainable against interlocutory orders that do not finally dispose of the suit, dismissing the petition accordingly.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 115 CPC revision jurisdiction interlocutory order final order

Rieter AG and Anr. v. Kavassery Narayanaswamy Venkatasubramanian

13 May 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:3937

The Delhi High Court held it has territorial jurisdiction over a suit for intellectual property infringement where the defendant participated in an exhibition near Delhi and delivered goods with invoice to Delhi, dismissing the defendant's challenge under Order VII Rule 10 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction Order VII Rule 10 CPC Section 20(c) CPC cause of action

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-1 v. Sneh Lata Sawhney

13 May 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:3617-DB

The Delhi High Court held that assessment orders passed beyond the limitation period cannot be saved by an invalid reference for information under the Indo-Swiss DTAA, as the amended treaty provisions effective from 01.04.2011 do not permit requests for prior periods, thus dismissing the Revenue's appeals.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 153B Limitation period Indo-Swiss Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement

Ram Vijay Raut v. Tara Chand & Anr

13 May 2025 · Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:3792

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and remanded the compensation claim for fresh assessment, holding that credible evidence can establish employer-employee relationship despite lack of formal documents under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 employer-employee relationship compensation claim injury during employment

Randhawa Ultrasonography Imaging and Research Institute v. State of NCT, Delhi

13 May 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:3836

The Delhi High Court held that FIR registration and police investigation under the PC&PNDT Act are not barred by Section 28, affirmed the jurisdiction of the West District Authority, and dismissed the petition seeking quashing of the FIR.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant PC&PNDT Act Appropriate Authority jurisdiction FIR registration Section 28 PC&PNDT Act

Devender Singh v. Dilip Kumar

13 May 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:3669

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's refusal to reject a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, holding that the suit disclosed a prima facie cause of action requiring trial despite alleged knowledge of pending litigation and disputed payment terms.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC cause of action rejection of plaint Agreement to Sell

Union of India v. M/S V.K. Sood Engineer & Contractors

13 May 2025 · Anish Dayal · 2025:DHC:3828

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to set aside the arbitral award, holding that jurisdictional objections raised late were waived and the award did not violate public policy or fundamental contractual principles.

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

A. S. Ismail v. National Investigation Agency

13 May 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:3824-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's interim bail application on medical grounds, holding that adequate treatment is being provided in custody and no exceptional circumstances warrant release.

criminal appeal_dismissed interim bail medical grounds stroke right sided hemiparesis

Ajay Kumar v. Najendra Singh & Ors.

13 May 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:3668
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court partly allowed the motor accident claim appeal, directing enhanced compensation for future prospects, treatment, pain and suffering, and increased interest rate, while affirming other findings.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 functional disability future prospects compensation enhancement

Mukul Rathore v. Virender Pratap Singh and Ors.

13 May 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:3664

Delhi High Court partly allowed motor accident appeal enhancing compensation for amputation injury and remanding for reassessment of various heads including disability, attendant charges, and artificial limb cost.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident compensation functional disability permanent disability loss of income

The New India Assurance Company Limited v. Rajan & Ors.

13 May 2025 · Amit Mahajan · (2011) 1 SCC 343

The Delhi High Court upheld an ₹89.57 lakh motor accident compensation award, affirming that functional disability must be assessed based on impact on earning capacity and that attendant charges are compensable even without documentary proof.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant functional disability motor accident claim compensation prosthetic limb

Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Meenakshi Madan & Ors.

13 May 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:3667
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the finding of negligence in a motor accident claim but remanded the case to adjust compensation for loss of future prospects and disallow double compensation for loss of love and affection.

civil appeal_partly_allowed Significant motor accident claim negligence preponderance of probabilities loss of future prospects