Delhi High Court

36,666 judgments

Year:

Ramesh Suneja v. Union of India

21 Apr 2025 · Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:2687

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and awarded compensation to a passenger injured due to accidental fall from a moving train, rejecting the Railways' claim of self-inflicted injury under Section 124-A of the Railways Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 Railways Act, 1989 Section 123(c) Section 124-A

Rizwan Ahmad & Ors. v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

21 Apr 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:2761

The Delhi High Court quashed FIR No. 1195/2023 under sections 498/406/34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual divorce between the parties, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 528 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita settlement in criminal cases matrimonial dispute

Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption Delhi v. IILM Foundation

21 Apr 2025 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tejas Karia

The Delhi High Court held that reasonable salary paid to a prohibited person for services rendered does not violate Section 13(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, thereby upholding exemption for the charitable trust under Sections 11/12.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 13(1)(c) Section 13(2)(c) charitable trust exemption

Vineet Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

21 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:2696-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the enhanced 'very good' benchmark for MACPS financial upgradation applies prospectively from 2016, and employees with lower grade pay remain entitled to benefits under the earlier 'good' benchmark for prior years.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme MACPS financial upgradation benchmark

Sanjay Yadav v. Union of India & Anr.

21 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:2697-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the sealed cover procedure for withholding Non-Functional Financial Upgradation can only be adopted after issuance of a charge sheet, and directed grant of NFFU to the petitioner whose case was wrongly kept in sealed cover before disciplinary proceedings commenced.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Non-Functional Financial Upgradation sealed cover procedure disciplinary proceedings charge sheet

Shri Naresh Garg v. Chottey Lal Pandey

21 Apr 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:2771

The Delhi High Court held that an appellate court must hear the decree-holder before granting stay of execution, emphasizing the requirement of natural justice.

civil other stay of execution principles of natural justice opportunity of hearing caveat

Sunil Gupta & Anr v. Punjab National Bank & Ors

21 Apr 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia

The Delhi High Court upheld Punjab National Bank's mortgage and auction sale of properties, rejecting Petitioners' fraud claims due to lack of cogent evidence against the bank and affirming the creditor's rights under the SARFAESI and Contract Acts.

civil petition_dismissed Significant mortgage fraud secured creditor SARFAESI Act

Kaushal Raj v. Ashok Kumar and Ors

21 Apr 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:2794

The High Court held that while defendants already imprisoned for non-compliance of an interim injunction could be released subject to apology affidavits, cancellation of warrants against other defendants without hearing the petitioner was improper and must be reconsidered.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC civil imprisonment interim injunction natural justice

Rima Gulshan v. Vishal Saluja & Anr.

21 Apr 2025 · Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:2773

The High Court upheld the trial court’s dismissal of contempt proceedings against a non-party, holding that interim orders bind only parties to the suit and third parties cannot be held liable for contempt without clear evidence of wilful disobedience.

civil appeal_dismissed Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC contempt of court interim injunction status quo

Parveen Kumar v. Delhi Cantonment Board & Anr.

21 Apr 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:2821

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the rejection of a building plan by the Delhi Cantonment Board, directing the petitioner to exhaust the statutory appeal remedy under Section 340 of the Cantonments Act, 2006.

administrative appeal_allowed Cantonments Act 2006 Section 340 building plan rejection statutory appeal

Sanjeev Kapur v. M/S Ashish Travels & Anr.

21 Apr 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:2824

The Delhi High Court held that Mr. Sanjeev Kapur is a necessary and proper party to the recovery suit against CPWD and dismissed the petition challenging his impleadment.

civil petition_dismissed Order I Rule 10 CPC necessary party proper party impleadment

Om Prakash and Ors. v. Kishan Chand

21 Apr 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:2827

The High Court dismissed the petition seeking amendment of pleadings in a pending appeal to introduce new claims based on a subsequent sale deed, holding that such claims must be pursued through separate proceedings.

civil petition_dismissed amendment of pleadings Order VI Rule 17 CPC Section 151 CPC subsequent sale deed

Marry Messy v. Naveen Behal

21 Apr 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:2828

The Delhi High Court permitted the defendant and her husband to lead evidence belatedly with conditions including payment of costs and limitation to one effective opportunity, balancing procedural fairness and delay.

civil petition_allowed recovery of possession arrears of rent mesne profits evidence-affidavits

Western Digital Technologies, Inc. & Anr. v. Hansraj Dugar

21 Apr 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:3844

The Delhi High Court held that lawful import and resale of genuine second-hand or refurbished goods bearing registered trademarks is permissible under the principle of international exhaustion, subject to full disclosure and compliance with trademark law.

civil other Significant trademark infringement international exhaustion second-hand goods refurbished goods

Union of India & Anr. v. Sudhir Tyagi

17 Apr 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:2621

The Delhi High Court held that post-award interest under Section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration Act is mandatory at 18% per annum unless the arbitral award specifies otherwise, limiting the arbitrator's discretion to the rate of interest only.

civil petition_dismissed Significant post-award interest Section 31(7)(b) Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 statutory interest

Hippocampus Infotech Private Ltd and Anr v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr

17 Apr 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:2620

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's refusal to recall a complainant witness under Section 311 CrPC, emphasizing that such discretionary power must be exercised judiciously and not to enable delay or abuse of process.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 311 CrPC recall of witness discretionary power cross-examination

Satvir Singh v. UOI & Ors.

17 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:2618-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that arbitrary reduction of interview marks violating prescribed criteria and Article 14 warrants compensation, but retrospective appointment after long delay is impractical.

administrative petition_allowed Significant recruitment process arbitrariness Article 14 malice in law

Umesh and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

17 Apr 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:2617-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that respondents were not obligated to maintain Reserve Lists in recruitment processes where the recruitment notices explicitly prohibited such lists, dismissing petitions challenging non-maintenance of Reserve Lists.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Reserve List Waiting List Recruitment Detailed Medical Examination

Mayur Khade v. Government of NCT of Delhi

17 Apr 2025 · Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:2663

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner in a commercial quantity NDPS case, emphasizing the impact of trial delay and insufficient prima facie evidence directly linking the petitioner to the contraband.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant NDPS Act Section 37 NDPS regular bail commercial quantity

Vijay Kohli & Anr. v. Sanjay Jethwani

17 Apr 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:4455
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a suit for specific performance of a pure building contract for residential construction does not constitute a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and is maintainable before civil courts.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Commercial Courts Act, 2015 commercial dispute construction contract specific performance