Delhi High Court
92,628 judgments
M/S HAMDARD LABORATORIES (INDIA) v. M/S SUNRISE AGRILAND DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH PVT. LTD.
The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate contractual disputes, holding that judicial scrutiny at the Section 11 stage is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement without delving into merits.
CASIO INDIA COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4-2 & ANR
The Delhi High Court directed the Income Tax appellate authority to decide the petitioner’s pending appeal within twelve weeks due to inordinate delay, refusing to quash the assessment order.
Banaras House Ltd v. Sodan Singh & Anr
The Delhi High Court set aside an ex parte labour award for failure to record reasons, emphasizing the necessity of reasoned decisions in quasi-judicial proceedings and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
CARS 24 FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED v. SHAIK RAHMAN PROPRIETOR OF M/S RAHMAN CARS & ANR
The Delhi High Court held that at the stage of appointing an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, judicial scrutiny is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute arising from a credit facility agreement.
M/S LOKESH SANITARY STORE v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte GST adjudication order due to defective notice and lack of personal hearing, permitting fresh adjudication while leaving the validity of the impugned notification pending before the Supreme Court.
M/S MONEYWISE FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD v. M/S ISHWARI HEALTH CARE PVT LTD AND ORS
The Delhi High Court held that at the appointment stage under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, judicial scrutiny is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed the sole arbitrator accordingly.
M/S MONEYWISE FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD v. MK TRADERS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR AND ANR
The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11 stage, judicial scrutiny is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the loan dispute.
Square Vision India Pvt Ltd v. PCIT-7, Delhi
The Delhi High Court allowed condonation of a one-day delay in filing income tax return due to genuine hardship caused by technical difficulties, setting aside the tax authority's rejection on grounds of limitation and absence of hardship.
M/S CONTRUCTION INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL v. M/S MCM WORLDWIDE PRIVATE LIMIED & ANR
The Delhi High Court held that the respondent's claim was barred by limitation under Article 18 of the Limitation Act, and a post-limitation acknowledgment letter could not extend the limitation period, rendering the dispute non-arbitrable and allowing the appeal.
Union of India and Another v. Hemant Kumar
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Tribunal's stay on suspension as infructuous after the underlying Original Application was withdrawn and dismissed.
Delhi Jal Board v. SH O P Gaud
The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT order reinstating an employee dismissed for alleged forgery of caste certificate, holding that the criminal case closure and judicial finding of genuineness negated the departmental inquiry's basis.
Arvind Sagar v. Kavita @ Seema
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's appeal seeking recall of an ex-parte maintenance order under Section 125 Cr.P.C., holding that insufficient medical evidence and deliberate non-appearance do not justify setting aside such orders.
Ashok Kumar Gupta v. Suresh Chand Gupta
The Delhi High Court dismissed the delayed appeal seeking modification of a consent decree for joint sale of property, holding that legal heirs cannot reopen such decree on inter se disputes.
Staff Selection Commission & Anr. v. Khabbab
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing a fresh medical examination where specialist opinion was not adequately considered in declaring a candidate unfit for police recruitment.
Union of India v. Bhadar Sain Chandolia
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order granting the 3rd MACP benefit to employees by counting their past service from initial appointment despite re-appointment by absorption.
Chaman Lal v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to treat it as a representation, decide it promptly, and keep any adverse decision in abeyance for one week to allow the petitioner to seek legal remedies.
Eureka Forbes Limited v. Nandan Sales and Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and damages to Eureka Forbes against defendants for trademark and copyright infringement and passing off involving counterfeit water purifier products, decreeing the suit under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC due to defendants’ non-appearance.
Sombir v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court allowed withdrawal of a writ petition seeking mandamus for consideration of a representation already decided, granting liberty to file a proper petition challenging the decision.
Balwan Singh v. Union of India and Anr
The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to decide the petitioner’s representation against his transfer within four weeks, ensuring procedural fairness without immediate quashing of the transfer order.
M/S Nikon Finlease Pvt. Ltd. v. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -04, Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) for filing a revised income tax return to rectify a clerical error, holding that such errors not affecting income assessment warrant leniency.