Delhi High Court

36,666 judgments

Year:

Ajay Kumar v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

02 May 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:3833

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking CBI/SIT probe into police misconduct allegations arising from matrimonial disputes, holding that police inquiries were adequate and complaints baseless.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 482 Cr.P.C. CBI/SIT investigation police misconduct matrimonial dispute

IDEMIA IDENTITY AND SECURITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 25 DELHI

02 May 2025 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:3227-DB

The Delhi High Court held that reopening an income tax assessment is barred by limitation if the escaped income for the relevant year is below ₹50 lakhs and recurring payments cannot be aggregated as a singular event under Section 149(1A).

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 148 Section 149(1)(a) Section 149(1A)

IDEMIA IDENTITY AND SECURITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 25 DELHI

02 May 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:3225-DB

The Delhi High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment beyond limitation is impermissible by aggregating escaped income over multiple years unless it relates to a single event, and set aside the notice issued to Idemia Identity and Security India Pvt. Ltd. for AY 2019-20.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 148 Section 149 limitation Reopening of assessment

Shri Manoj Sabharwal v. Shri Azad Ali

02 May 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:3757

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner’s delayed writ challenging an order directing payment of unpaid wages under the Delhi Shops & Establishments Act, holding that failure to contest evidence and unexplained delay warranted dismissal.

labor appeal_dismissed Delhi Shops & Establishments Act, 1954 Section 21 employer-employee relationship wages dispute

Harshvardhan Metals Ltd & Anr. v. ISF Commodities (P) Ltd

02 May 2025 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:3776

The Delhi High Court held that MCX bye-laws cannot mandate deposit of the awarded amount before filing a statutory challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitral award Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act MCX Bye-Laws Deposit of awarded amount

East West Products Limited v. Vijani Exim EVT Ltd

02 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:3707

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's discretion in dismissing a summary judgment application under Order XII Rule 6 CPC due to absence of clear and unequivocal admission, requiring a full trial to resolve disputed claims.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC judgment on admissions discretionary power audited balance sheet

CEPCO INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED v. TEWARI RESTAURANT PRIVATE LIMITED

02 May 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:3694

The Delhi High Court lifted the corporate veil to hold directors personally liable for admitted rent arrears, converted an ordinary suit into a commercial suit, and passed decree for Rs. 2.47 Crores with interest against the defendants.

civil appeal_allowed Significant corporate veil lifting rent arrears commercial suit Commercial Courts Act 2015

Shruti Manav Sharma & Anr. v. Sunaina Singh

02 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:3644

The High Court held that applications pending before the court cannot be dismissed due to death of a party without impleadment of legal representatives and directed the trial court to hear the applications afresh after impleadment.

civil appeal_allowed Significant death of party impleadment Order VII Rule 11 CPC Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC

Capital Impex Pvt Ltd v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 4(2), Delhi

02 May 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:3377-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a notice under Section 148 issued beyond the prescribed limitation period post-search conducted after 01.04.2021 is invalid, setting aside the reopening of assessment for AY 2014-15.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 149(1) Section 153A

Sanjay Kumar Jain v. Rajan Kumar Jain & Anr.

02 May 2025 · Jyoti Singh · 2025:DHC:3528

The Delhi High Court held that an arbitration clause in a partnership deed survives dissolution and appointed an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes relating to the dissolved partnership.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration Clause Partnership Dissolution Settlement of Accounts Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act

GMTD BSNL Hisar Haryana v. Suresh Kumar Security Agency

02 May 2025 · Navin Chawla; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:3215-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging an arbitral award awarding interest on delayed payments under a security services contract, affirming limited judicial interference under the Arbitration Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Section 37 DGR guidelines

Exclusive Capital Ltd. v. Silver and C.Z. International

02 May 2025 · Navin Chawla; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:3212-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the mandatory nature of pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, dismissing the appeal and plaint for non-compliance where no genuine urgent interim relief was established.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 12A Commercial Courts Act pre-institution mediation Order VII Rule 11 CPC urgent interim relief

Shri Sube Singh v. Delhi Transport Corporation

02 May 2025 · Anish Dayal · 2025:DHC:3329

The Delhi High Court held that setting aside a punishment without expressly granting consequential benefits does not entitle a workman to promotion, and the writ petition challenging denial of promotion was dismissed.

labor petition_dismissed Significant Industrial Tribunal award promotion entitlement consequential benefits setting aside punishment

Government of NCT of Delhi v. Sunil Kumar and Ors.

02 May 2025 · Navin Chawla; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:3398-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing payment to contractual employees for the period between termination and reinstatement, holding that 'no work no pay' does not apply when the employer prevents employees from working.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant contractual employment termination reinstatement no work no pay

Attar Singh v. Nitin Shokeen & Anr.

02 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:3388

The Delhi High Court held that revision under Section 115 CPC is maintainable only against final orders disposing of the suit, dismissing the petition challenging an interlocutory order.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 115 CPC revision petition final order interim order

Rajiv Sarin; Deepak Sarin; Radhika Sarin v. Directorate of Estates; Ministry of Labour & Employment; Competent Authority under SAFEMA

02 May 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:3297

The Delhi High Court held that the defendants' possession of the property post-quashing of a SAFEMA forfeiture order was illegal, entitling the plaintiffs to damages for mesne profits, maintenance charges, and property tax.

civil appeal_allowed Significant illegal occupation mesne profits forfeiture order SAFEMA

Nine Rivers Capital Limited v. Gokul Patnaik and Anr.

02 May 2025 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:3276
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the enforceability of a foreign arbitral award directing specific performance under a related agreement, rejecting jurisdictional and public policy objections, and allowing enforcement despite an exclusive jurisdiction clause for Mumbai courts.

civil petition_allowed Significant foreign arbitral award enforcement jurisdiction exclusive jurisdiction clause

Lakshmi Murdeshwar Puri v. Saket Gokhale & Ors.

02 May 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:3261

The Delhi High Court dismissed the defendant's application to recall an ex parte decree and condone delay, holding that actual notice and lack of sufficient cause preclude setting aside the decree under Order IX Rule 13 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order IX Rule 13 CPC ex parte decree sufficient cause condonation of delay

Abrol v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 28(1), Delhi

02 May 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:3205-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 for AY 2015-16 issued after 1 April 2021, following the Revenue's concession on limitation under TOLA and procedural non-compliance.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 148 Section 148A Taxation and Other Laws Act 2020

Ratnagiri Gas and Power Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 19(1), Delhi & Ors.

02 May 2025 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:3168-DB

The Delhi High Court held that reassessment proceedings initiated beyond the limitation period without requisite evidence of escaped income represented as an asset are barred and quashed the impugned notice and order.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 148A Section 149 limitation