Delhi High Court

36,666 judgments

Year:

OZAR HOMES LLP v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

25 Feb 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:1243

The Delhi High Court held that the highest bidder in a public auction has no vested right to acceptance of the bid and upheld the DDA's lawful rejection of the petitioner's highest bid based on reasoned market value considerations.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant highest bidder public auction Delhi Development Authority bid rejection

D. Arjun @ Devender Arjun v. State, NCT of Delhi

25 Feb 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1261

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in a murder case, holding that mere presence at the crime scene without direct evidence of causing injury does not justify denial of bail, subject to conditions safeguarding the trial process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail serious offences Section 302 IPC Article 21

Mushir Alam v. Narcotics Control Bureau

25 Feb 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1267
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the accused in a commercial quantity NDPS case due to prolonged trial delay and incarceration, dispensing with Section 37 conditions to uphold the accused's fundamental rights.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant NDPS Act Section 37 NDPS bail commercial quantity

M/S Bihar Lal Manoj Kumar v. Deepak Sharma

25 Feb 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:1270

The Delhi High Court granted the tenant an extension to vacate the premises until 31.05.2025 on payment of user charges and compliance with conditions, staying the eviction order subject to an undertaking.

property appeal_allowed eviction order extension of time user and occupation charges vacant possession

Surinder Kumar v. Karamvir Tyagi

25 Feb 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:1272
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court granted the tenant additional time to vacate premises subject to payment of user charges and filing an undertaking, staying the eviction order until 30.04.2025.

property appeal_allowed eviction order extension of time user charges vacant possession

Mr. Abdul Sattar v. Hameeda Shahzad

25 Feb 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:1274

The Delhi High Court granted the tenant additional time to vacate premises subject to increased user charges and an undertaking, staying eviction execution until 30.09.2025.

property appeal_allowed eviction order extension of time user and occupation charges vacant possession

Jasvinder Singh v. The Chairman DDA and Ors

25 Feb 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:1278

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition seeking demolition of unauthorized construction, directing the petitioner to pursue complaints before the Supreme Court constituted Special Task Force and urging cooperation between DDA and MCD.

administrative appeal_dismissed unauthorized construction Special Task Force Delhi Development Authority Municipal Corporation of Delhi

HIMALAYA GLOBAL HOLDINGS LTD. v. RAJASTHAN AUSHDHALAYA PRIVATE LIMITED

25 Feb 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:1670

The Delhi High Court held that the defendants infringed the plaintiffs' 'Liv.52' trademark by using the deceptively similar 'Liv-333' mark, allowed the suit under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC due to defendants' failure to file written statement, and awarded injunction, costs, and damages.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement Order VIII Rule 10 CPC permanent injunction passing off

Discovery Drilling Pte Limited v. Parmod Kumar & Anr.

24 Feb 2025 · Navin Chawla · 2025:DHC:1149

The Delhi High Court held that the Singapore International Commercial Court is a superior Court under Section 44A CPC, allowing enforcement of its judgment in India despite respondents' jurisdictional and procedural objections.

civil petition_allowed Significant Section 44A CPC Singapore International Commercial Court foreign decree enforcement superior Court

Ashok Kumar Jha v. Vijay Kumar

24 Feb 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:1675

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition challenging dismissal of a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act for unlawful dispossession, holding that the petitioner failed to prove possession or forcible dispossession after a final eviction order.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 6 Specific Relief Act unlawful dispossession eviction order revision petition

MRP (Identity Withheld) v. State (NCT of Delhi)

24 Feb 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:1378

The Delhi High Court upheld charges under Section 354 IPC for outraging modesty of a minor but set aside charges under Section 10 POCSO Act due to absence of sexual intent and emphasized the necessity of reasoned orders at the charge framing stage.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 354 IPC Section 10 POCSO Act sexual intent charge framing

Om Gupta v. State of Delhi NCT

24 Feb 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:1172
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions challenging discharge of accused due to absence of fresh evidence in supplementary chargesheet and lack of application of mind in summoning order.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant summoning order supplementary chargesheet Section 173(8) CrPC application of mind

Sumit Kumar v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr

24 Feb 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1266
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to a CRPF constable accused of serious offences after considering the stage of trial, lack of substantiated threat, and the accused's societal ties.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Section 439 CrPC heinous offence pre-trial custody

Mahesh@Vikram v. State NCT of Delhi

24 Feb 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1269

The Delhi High Court allowed parole to a long-incarcerated prisoner, holding that stale misconduct cannot bar parole when recent conduct is satisfactory and humanitarian grounds exist.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant parole late surrender prison rules humanitarian grounds

Jitendra v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

24 Feb 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1268
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted bail to an accused in a commercial quantity NDPS case due to prolonged trial delay and incarceration, dispensing with Section 37 restrictions in light of Article 21 protections.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant NDPS Act Section 37 NDPS bail commercial quantity

Chander Prakash Alias Pappu v. State of NCT of Delhi

24 Feb 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1271
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that unwillingness of a convict’s family to furnish surety is not sufficient to dispense with surety conditions for furlough, emphasizing the need to balance individual rights with public interest and risk of absconding.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant furlough surety personal bond discretion to dispense surety

Sarfraz Ahmed v. UCO Bank & Ors.

24 Feb 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:1275

The Delhi High Court directed UCO Bank to release amounts under two Fixed Deposit Receipts to the petitioner holding a Succession Certificate, emphasizing the bank's obligation despite claims of missing records.

civil petition_allowed Succession Certificate Indian Succession Act, 1925 Fixed Deposit Receipt Bank liability

Rajesh Kumar v. Union of India

24 Feb 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1229-DB

The High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition as the petitioner intended to approach the Tribunal, disposing of the petition accordingly.

other petition_dismissed Procedural writ petition withdrawal High Court of Delhi petition disposed

Arcturus Therapeutics Inc v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs

24 Feb 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:1361

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal against refusal of a patent application based solely on procedural delay, remanding the matter for fresh consideration on merits.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed patent application procedural delay natural justice patents act

Central Bureau of Investigation v. State of NCT of Delhi

24 Feb 2025 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2025:DHC:1307
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Court held that the CBI must produce the Final Report Part-I in a sealed cover for judicial perusal at the cognizance stage under exceptional circumstances, balancing confidentiality with the Court's duty to scrutinize the investigation.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Final Report Part-I crime file CBI investigation Section 124 Indian Evidence Act