Delhi High Court
92,628 judgments
Power Grid Corporation of India Limited v. SPML Infra Limited
The Delhi High Court extended the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal despite respondent's objections on fee enhancement and bias, holding that apprehension of bias alone does not warrant substitution and fee issues already adjudicated cannot be reopened.
Sarabjeet Singh @ Binny v. State
The Delhi High Court held that police cannot hand over possession of immovable property during investigation and restoration of possession can only be ordered by a criminal court after conviction, dismissing the petition seeking such relief prior to trial.
The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -7 v. Quippo Telecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding that a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained if the penalty notice does not specify the limb of penalty and the issue is debatable with full particulars furnished by the assessee.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7, Delhi v. M/S Wrigley India Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, holding that AMP expenses incurred in the normal course of business do not constitute separate international transactions for transfer pricing and cannot be benchmarked using the Bright Line Test.
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Kiran Verma & Bharat Verma
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to recall anticipatory bail granted to respondents accused of gold smuggling, holding that reasonable apprehension of arrest justified bail despite ongoing investigation.
AAPKA HUMDUM SOLUTIONS AND SERVICES LLP v. HARSH DODEJA
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.
Union of India v. M/S GR-GAWA R(J.V.)
The Delhi High Court dismissed a Section 34 arbitration challenge as barred by limitation, holding that filing without the arbitral award is non est and cannot be cured by later rectification beyond the statutory period.
Siemens Financial Services Pvt Ltd v. Dr Vikas Saroha & 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 an arbitrator to adjudicate the loan dispute.
RAM KRISHAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. v. ASIAN HOTEL (NORTH) LTD
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging an arbitrator's mandate for alleged non-disclosure and conflict, holding that statutory grounds for disqualification were not met and the arbitration must proceed.
Union of India v. Inland World Logistics Pvt. Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging an arbitral award for compensation due to lease termination, affirming limited appellate interference under the Arbitration Act and rejecting new grounds raised for the first time in appeal.
SS Sehrawat v. UOI and Ors.
The Delhi High Court set aside the removal order of a CISF officer for procedural violations in disciplinary inquiry but directed his compulsory retirement with pension benefits due to superannuation and delay.
Ram Dhar Singh v. State NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner accused of murder and robbery, emphasizing the circumstantial nature of evidence, prolonged custody, and imposing strict conditions to protect trial integrity.
Naveen @ Sandeep v. State NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner accused of murder under Sections 302/34 IPC, holding that the gravity of offence alone cannot deny bail and imposing conditions to safeguard the trial.
Chizoba James v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed bail to a foreign national accused of commercial quantity narcotics offence, holding that procedural delays under Section 52A NDPS Act do not warrant bail absent prejudice and that stringent bail conditions under Section 37 apply.
Great Eastern Energy Corporation Limited v. Sopan Projects
The Delhi High Court terminated the mandate of a sole arbitrator due to undue and unexplained delay in rendering the arbitral award, emphasizing the public policy of speedy dispute resolution under Section 14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Shweta Dutta v. Veena Dutta & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a plaint for partition cannot be rejected for no cause of action or limitation without proof of relinquishment of share, but directed the plaintiff to pay ad-valorem Court fees or face rejection.
T.R. Chadha and Co. LLP v. Satyanarayan Jhunjhunwala & Ors.
The High Court upheld the trial court's finding that the plaint discloses a cause of action but remanded the issue of whether the suit is barred under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act for trial court adjudication.
State, NCT of Delhi v. Shiv Shankar
The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's appeal and upheld the acquittal of the accused due to non-recovery of the weapon and material contradictions in the prosecution evidence, applying the benefit of doubt principle.
Minoti Bahri v. Anish Handa & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings against a Non-Executive Director for alleged company offences due to lack of specific allegations of her involvement or criminal intent.
Pankaj Arora v. Anil Kumar Bansal & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that Section 8 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 bars civil revision petitions against interlocutory orders of Commercial Courts, dismissing the petition accordingly.