Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Dinesh Kundra v. State

11 Mar 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:1961
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court held that sentences awarded under Section 138 NI Act for multiple cheques issued in discharge of a single liability must run concurrently, while sentences in default of fine run separately.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 427 Cr.P.C. Concurrent sentence Consecutive sentence

Delhi Development Authority v. V.N. Gupta

11 Mar 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1848-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order restoring pay protection and pension benefits to a government employee, emphasizing the mandatory requirement of natural justice before withdrawing such benefits.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant pay protection natural justice service continuity pensionary benefits

Ramchander v. Union of India & Another

11 Mar 2025 · Jyoti Singh, J. · 2025:DHC:1804

The Delhi High Court held that a writ petition is not maintainable to enforce a refund claim arising from a set-aside arbitral award where effective statutory remedies under the Arbitration Act exist and dismissed the petition accordingly.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Section 37 Article 226

Milliken and Company v. Controller of Patents and Designs & Anr.

11 Mar 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:1782

The Delhi High Court remanded a patent refusal order for reconsideration, directing the Patent Office to consider expert evidence filed within time and clarified that foreign patent decisions are not binding in India.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant patent refusal expert evidence inventive step sufficiency of disclosure

Ravi Bhasker v. Union of India & Ors.

11 Mar 2025 · Navin Chawla; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:1641-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the medical standards prescribed by the Indian Navy for commissioning, dismissing the petitioner's challenge to being declared medically unfit due to calcified granuloma exceeding prescribed limits.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant medical standards calcified granuloma Indian Navy commissioning Armed Forces Tribunal

Md Nojibur Rahaman v. Union of India & Ors.

11 Mar 2025 · Navin Chawla; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:1620-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Border Security Force to provide reasons for the petitioner's downgradation in the seniority list and allowed him to challenge the reasons thereafter.

administrative other seniority list downgradation Border Security Force natural justice

Sardar Surjeet Singh v. Union of India

11 Mar 2025 · Navin Chawla; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:1603-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Indian Air Force to consider early release of a petitioner for civil employment subject to operational needs, balancing service exigencies with individual rights.

administrative other No Objection Certificate Premature release Air Force Orders Operational necessity

DC/JAG Deepti Man and DC/GD Sandeep v. Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force

11 Mar 2025 · Navin Chawla; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:1597-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking age relaxation of 3 months and 12 days for recruitment as Medical Officer, holding that the prescribed age limit must be strictly followed absent exceptional circumstances.

administrative petition_dismissed age relaxation recruitment advertisement Medical Officer Other Backward Class

The Indian Hotels Company Limited v. Gaurav Roy Bhatt & Anr.

11 Mar 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:1714

The Delhi High Court declared the plaintiff's TAJ marks as well-known trade marks and granted permanent injunction against defendants for infringement and passing off.

civil appeal_allowed Significant well-known trade mark permanent injunction trade mark infringement passing off

FMC Corporation Authorised Representative Mr Sachin Desai & Ors. v. Hindustan Fertilizers Private Limited & Anr.

11 Mar 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:1704

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction to FMC Corporation against Hindustan Fertilizers for infringing the registered trademark 'CORAGEN' by using the deceptively similar mark 'CORAGIN' on identical agrochemical products.

civil appeal_allowed trademark infringement passing off permanent injunction deceptively similar mark

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Dev Kumari & Ors.

11 Mar 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:1696

The Delhi High Court clarified that legal heirs who are not dependents are entitled to compensation for loss to the estate, not loss of dependency, and recalculated compensation accordingly in a motor accident claim.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 loss of dependency loss to the estate compensation calculation

National Highways Authority of India v. Pankaj Kumar

11 Mar 2025 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2025:DHC:1637-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of a debarment order against an engineer for failure to issue a show cause notice, emphasizing strict adherence to natural justice in administrative blacklisting.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant debarment blacklisting natural justice show cause notice

Miyan v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors

11 Mar 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:1658-DB

The Delhi High Court directed transfer of investigation to the Crime Branch and CBI in a missing person case after finding police investigation inadequate, emphasizing judicial oversight in cases involving potential kidnapping and human trafficking.

criminal other Significant habeas corpus missing person investigation transfer Article 226 Constitution

Muhammad Nazim v. The Commissioner of Customs & Ors.

11 Mar 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:1655-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Customs Department's confiscation and penalty order but emphasized mandatory proper communication of notices and orders, directing the petitioner be given time to seek remedies after actual receipt.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Customs Act, 1962 show cause notice confiscation penalty

Nahar Singh Kothari v. Medical Council of India

11 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:1665

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging permanent debarment from medical administrative posts, holding the issue academic due to the petitioner's age exceeding the regulatory limit and the debarment non-stigmatic.

administrative petition_dismissed debarment medical institutions Teachers Eligibility Qualifications Regulations 2022 maximum age limit

NCM (India) Ltd. v. Air India Ltd.

11 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2024 SCC OnLine SC 965
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition against Air India Ltd. post-privatization, holding that it ceased to be a State instrumentality and is not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Article 226 privatization Air India Ltd. State instrumentality

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