Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Mohinder Singh & Ors. v. MCD

10 Mar 2025 · Jyoti Singh · 2025:DHC:1676

Delhi High Court directs MCD to pay Rs. 4,68,800 with interest as compensation for death caused by stray cattle due to MCD's negligence, safeguarding minor dependents' interests through fixed deposits.

administrative petition_allowed Significant compensation Municipal Corporation of Delhi stray cattle negligence

Anil Kumar S V v. Union of India & Ors.

10 Mar 2025 · Navin Chawla; Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:1575-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside adverse remarks and downgraded grading in a BSF officer's APAR due to lack of factual basis and procedural fairness, allowing the petition challenging the same.

administrative petition_allowed Significant APAR Accepting Officer adverse remarks natural justice

Yogender Kumar v. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi & Ors.

10 Mar 2025 · Jyoti Singh, J. · 2025:DHC:1558

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an ex parte vesting and ejectment order under the Delhi Land Reforms Act, holding that revenue authorities act on revenue records and title disputes must be resolved by civil courts.

property petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 vesting order ejectment recorded owner

INPRAPRASTHA COLLEGE OF WOMEN v. MS HIMANI MALHOTRA & ANR

10 Mar 2025 · Jyoti Singh, J. · 2025:DHC:1557

The Delhi High Court held that disputes relating to termination of university teachers under Ordinance XII are arbitrable, and challenges to Appeal Committee awards must be made under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, not by writ petition.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement Appeal Committee University of Delhi Act, 1922 Article 226 Constitution

Tulsi Ram v. Union of India and Ors.

10 Mar 2025 · Navin Chawla; Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:1684-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed erroneous orders revising ACP/MACP dates and recovery from the petitioner, directing refund with interest and confirming pension fixation based on the correct initial appointment date.

administrative petition_allowed ACP benefits MACP benefits pension fixation recovery order

Staff Selection Commission & Ors. v. Sankit Singh

10 Mar 2025 · Navin Chawla; Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:1621-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing re-examination of a candidate declared medically unfit due to Vitiligo, emphasizing reliance on expert medical opinion for fitness assessments.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant medical fitness Review Medical Board Vitiligo Vulgaris Central Administrative Tribunal

Gajendra Singh and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

10 Mar 2025 · Navin Chawla; Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:1589-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 13

The Delhi High Court directed the government to implement its earlier judgment granting Nonfunctional Upgradation benefits to the petitioners, rejecting administrative delay as a ground for denial.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Nonfunctional Upgradation Grade Pay Rs.5400 Writ of Certiorari Writ of Mandamus

M/S SAHA TRADERS v. ZONAL JOINT DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

10 Mar 2025 · Sachin Datta · 2025:DHC:1667

The Delhi High Court set aside a decades-old unadjudicated Show Cause Notice and subsequent cancellation of DEPB licenses for violating natural justice and statutory duty of timely adjudication.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Show Cause Notice DEPB License Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992 Natural Justice

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 v. M/S East Delhi Leasing Pvt. Ltd.

10 Mar 2025 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2025:DHC:1638-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the criminal law standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt is inapplicable to tax proceedings under section 148, quashing the ITAT order and remitting the matter for fresh consideration applying the correct 'reason to believe' standard.

tax appeal_allowed Significant reason to believe reason to suspect section 148 Income Tax Act reopening of assessment

Nitin Vashisht v. State of NCT of Delhi

10 Mar 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1672
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application of Nitin Vashisht in a serious financial fraud case, holding that custodial interrogation is necessary given the prima facie evidence and the gravity of offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, and 471 IPC.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant anticipatory bail Section 482 BNSS cheating forgery

Gopika Vennankot Govind v. Union of India & Ors.

10 Mar 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:1660-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed the customs confiscation of a minor's personal gold jewellery for lack of procedural fairness and held that eligible passengers are entitled to carry personal jewellery without penalty under the Baggage Rules, 2016.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs Act, 1962 Baggage Rules, 2016 confiscation personal jewellery

Amal Krishna v. Union of India & Ors.

10 Mar 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:1659-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed the confiscation of a passenger's personal gold jewellery by customs for non-declaration, holding that personal effects worn by eligible passengers cannot be seized without proper notice and hearing.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs Act, 1962 Baggage Rules, 2016 personal jewellery confiscation

Yogendra Singh Balyan v. Union of India

10 Mar 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:1613-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging a penalty order under the Customs Act, directing the petitioner to raise limitation and other objections before the statutory Appellate Authority.

administrative petition_dismissed Customs Act, 1962 Section 114AA Section 128 Show Cause Notice

Kumari Gayatri Tripathi v. Trust Mandir Shri Ramchanderji

10 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2021 SCC OnLine Del 4284

The Delhi High Court dismissed the tenant's petition for restoration of possession under Section 19 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, holding that possession lawfully restored to the landlord renders such petitions infructuous.

property petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) Section 19 eviction

Anita & Ors. v. Mahender Kumar

10 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:1662

The Delhi High Court granted the Petitioners time until 31.12.2025 to vacate tenanted premises subject to payment of occupation charges and filing an undertaking, staying eviction execution on compliance.

property appeal_allowed eviction order stay of execution user and occupation charges vacant possession

Ashish Pathak v. Central Bureau of Investigation

10 Mar 2025 · Sanjeev Narula · 2025:DHC:1650

The Delhi High Court held that a timely filed complete chargesheet bars the accused’s entitlement to default bail despite ongoing further investigation and supplementary chargesheets.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant default bail Section 167(2) CrPC chargesheet completeness Section 173(2) CrPC

Tribhuvan and Vikash Singh v. Geetanjali Mehta

10 Mar 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1630-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a belated writ petition challenging a Tribunal order and directed compliance with the order without affirming its correctness.

administrative appeal_dismissed writ petition belated filing Tribunal order compliance

Amirhossein Alizadeh v. The Commissioner of Customs & Ors.

10 Mar 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:1611-DB

The Delhi High Court quashed the detention of gold ornaments by Customs due to non-issuance and non-service of statutory notices and ordered their release with waiver of storage charges.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs detention Show Cause Notice Order-in-Original natural justice

Sheikh Iqbal Ahmed & Ors. v. Ashwani Kumar Gupta & Ors.

10 Mar 2025 · Subramonium Prasad · 2025:DHC:1635

The Delhi High Court granted interim relief allowing defendants to use a common passage till 8:30 PM with security arrangements, holding that unilateral restriction of access by co-owners is impermissible and business losses justify injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant common passage interim injunction Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC compromise decree

Ayush Shukla v. National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. & Anr.

10 Mar 2025 · Prateek Jalan · 2025:DHC:1607

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking issuance of a call letter in a recruitment process due to the petitioner’s failure to provide the mandatory GATE registration number, emphasizing strict compliance with application requirements.

administrative petition_dismissed recruitment GATE examination application form error call letter