Delhi High Court

36,666 judgments

Year:

Sunil Tyagi v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

11 Mar 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:1647
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to Sunil Tyagi in a land fraud case after chargesheet filing, emphasizing no custodial interrogation was needed and imposing conditions to safeguard the investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail regular bail mediated settlement cheating

Ajay Gupta v. State

11 Mar 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:1648

The Delhi High Court upheld the framing of criminal charges against a property co-owner for unlawful entry and threats, emphasizing that possession must be recovered only through due legal process.

criminal petition_dismissed trespass possession lease agreement framing of charges

Kamlesh Khanna v. Geeta Sardana

11 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:2259

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of the tenant's leave to defend application, affirming the landlord's bona fide requirement for eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, and held that alternate accommodations cited by the tenant were unsuitable or unavailable.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) bona fide requirement leave to defend

Dr. Ravinder Kumar Mehra v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

11 Mar 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1624-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that interest on delayed retiral benefits must be calculated from the date of retirement, not from a later date fixed by the Tribunal, and allowed the writ petitions accordingly.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant retiral benefits interest on delayed payment superannuation Central Administrative Tribunal

Dr. Sushil Kumar Gupta v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

11 Mar 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1617-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that interest on delayed retiral benefits must be paid from the date of retirement, modifying the Tribunal's order to reflect this principle.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant retiral benefits interest on delayed payment superannuation Central Administrative Tribunal

Staff Selection Commission v. Ankesh Kumar

11 Mar 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1626-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's direction for a dermatological examination to verify the presence of a tattoo on a police constable aspirant's right forearm, affirming the validity of recruitment fitness criteria under Clause 13.[2].

administrative petition_dismissed Significant tattoo dermatological examination recruitment fitness Delhi Police Constable recruitment

Union of India v. Gurdeep Singh

11 Mar 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1628-DB

The Delhi High Court held that disciplinary penalty orders passed before retirement remain valid and appealable before competent authorities, and Rule 9 of the CCS Pension Rules applies only to post-retirement proceedings.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant disciplinary proceedings penalty order retirement competent authority

Pravesh Sachdeva v. Sarita Singh

11 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:2260
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction order on bona fide requirement grounds, holding that the tenant failed to show a triable issue regarding availability of suitable alternate accommodation and that the landlord is the best judge of premises needed for business.

property petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) bona fide requirement alternate accommodation

Dr. Amitesh Khare and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

11 Mar 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1622-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed withdrawal of a writ petition rendered academic by petitioners' retirement, reserving liberty to raise the legal question in future cases.

constitutional other Procedural writ petition withdrawal academic mootness question of law

Raj Kumar v. State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

11 Mar 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:1614-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition for production of a missing girl who had lawfully married, holding that non-disclosure of material facts rendered the petition not maintainable.

constitutional petition_dismissed habeas corpus Article 226 court marriage non-disclosure of facts

Bikash Kumar Jain v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Anr.

11 Mar 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:1643

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Securities Appellate Tribunal's refusal to condone delay, holding that the petitioner must exhaust the statutory appeal remedy under Section 15Z of the SEBI Act.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant writ petition Articles 226 and 227 SEBI Act Section 15Z

Mr. Hem Kumar and Mr. Rajeev Kumar v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

11 Mar 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:1642

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging DDA's cancellation of property transfer based on forged documents, directing reconsideration upon civil court's ownership decree.

administrative petition_dismissed transfer of property forgery fabrication of documents Delhi Development Authority

IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. Raman Kumar

11 Mar 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:1640
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld 50% contributory negligence on both the stationary truck driver and speeding car driver in a fatal accident, affirmed owner’s vicarious liability despite driver’s fake license, and set aside premature penal interest imposed on the insurer.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant contributory negligence vicarious liability fake driving license penal interest

Bentwood Seating System (P) Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India & Anr

11 Mar 2025 · Subramonium Prasad · 2025:DHC:1636

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that serious allegations of fraud involving fabricated foreign documents render the dispute non-arbitrable and must be adjudicated by civil courts.

commercial_arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant arbitrability fraud fabrication of documents arbitration agreement

Mohd. Munib v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr

11 Mar 2025 · Chandra Dhari Singh, J · 2025:DHC:1588
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Juvenile Justice Board's determination that the accused juvenile lacked capacity to be tried as an adult, affirmed bail granted under the JJ Act, and dismissed the revision petition challenging these orders.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Juvenile Justice Act 2015 Preliminary Assessment Age Determination Bail under JJ Act

Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

11 Mar 2025 · Yashwant Varma; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:1577-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court clarified that provisions for asset restoration costs may be deductible under Section 37 if meeting AS 29 criteria, and held that installation of new cell towers constitutes extension of existing business under Section 36(1)(iii), justifying proportionate interest disallowance.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Asset Reconstruction Cost Depreciation Section 32 Income Tax Act Section 37 Income Tax Act

Johnson & Johnson v. Pritamdas Arora T/A M/s Medserve & Anr

11 Mar 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:1585
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and awarded compensatory and exemplary damages against defendants for deliberate counterfeiting and trademark infringement of Johnson & Johnson's medical devices, emphasizing the grave public health risks involved.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement counterfeiting passing off permanent injunction

State Bank of India v. M/s. P. P. Jewellers Private Limited

11 Mar 2025 · Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:1595

The Delhi High Court dismissed the State Bank of India's writ petitions challenging adverse remarks made by the Magistrate under Section 14 SARFAESI Act, holding the remarks within jurisdiction and the petitions barred by delay.

civil petition_dismissed Significant SARFAESI Act Section 14 Ministerial function Adverse remarks Non-Prosecution dismissal

Jangeer Singh Trading as Jangeer Singh Kabulshah Agriculture Works v. Yogesh Jangid Trading as Jangid Agro Engineering & Anr.

11 Mar 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:1587

The Delhi High Court held that the defendant's bona fide use of his surname as a trademark protected under Section 35 of the Trade Marks Act precludes interim injunction for trademark infringement or passing off against the plaintiff's similar mark.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant trademark infringement passing off Section 35 Trade Marks Act bona fide use

State v. Firasul Nabi

11 Mar 2025 · Jasmeet Singh, J · 2025:DHC:2095

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a POCSO case, emphasizing that contradictions in the prosecutrix's testimony and lack of corroboration warranted benefit of doubt and dismissal of the appeal.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act sexual offence prosecutrix testimony contradictions in evidence