Delhi High Court

38,124 judgments

Year:

Ex Const Crew Pramod Yadav v. Union of India

14 Jan 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:229-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the BSF dismissal order for lack of territorial jurisdiction, applying the doctrine of forum non conveniens and directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum in Assam.

administrative petition_dismissed territorial jurisdiction cause of action forum non conveniens writ petition

Anand Kumar v. Union of India

14 Jan 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:206-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging CISF dismissal on grounds of forum non conveniens, directing the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional High Court in Tamil Nadu.

administrative petition_dismissed forum non conveniens cause of action territorial jurisdiction Article 226

Sunil Kumar Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

14 Jan 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:147-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a CRPF Pay Clerk for financial misconduct and denied compassionate allowance, emphasizing limited judicial interference in departmental inquiries conducted per natural justice.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant departmental inquiry dismissal from service misappropriation of government funds compassionate allowance

Rahul Jain v. M/S Yes Bank Limited

14 Jan 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:1054

The Delhi High Court reduced the surety bond amount in a cheque dishonour case, emphasizing that bail conditions must be reasonable, individualized, and not excessive to ensure meaningful access to bail.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail surety bond Section 440 Cr.P.C. Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Ramesh Chandra v. State of NCT of Delhi

14 Jan 2025 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:346

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 25 of the Arms Act against a petitioner for mere unconscious possession of a single live cartridge, reaffirming that conscious possession is essential for criminal liability under the Arms Act.

criminal petition_allowed Significant conscious possession Arms Act, 1959 live ammunition quashing of FIR

Rajan Handa v. State

14 Jan 2025 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2025:DHC:305

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking FIR registration under Section 156(3) CrPC in a family dispute involving alleged forgery and breach of trust, holding that the matter was essentially civil and police investigation was not warranted at this stage.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 156(3) CrPC Section 200 CrPC Section 482 CrPC forgery

Gurushiddappa N Shirol v. Union of India & Ors.

14 Jan 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:194-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner’s disability benefits claim as a representation and decide it within a specified time, without adjudicating on the merits.

administrative other writ petition mandamus disability benefits Golden Jubilee Seema Prahari Kalyan Kawach scheme

S. Vaikundarajan v. Union of India and Anr.

14 Jan 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:248

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging cancellation of an Exploration License, granting liberty to approach the Supreme Court where identical issues are pending.

administrative petition_dismissed Procedural Exploration License Cancellation Judicial Review Principles of Natural Justice

Aayub v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

14 Jan 2025 · Amit Sharma · 2025:DHC:223
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court’s framing of charges under Sections 307/34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act, holding that a prima facie case existed and defenses raised by the accused are to be tested at trial, not at the charge framing stage.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant framing of charge prima facie case Section 307 IPC Section 27 Arms Act

Vikramjit Singh v. Narcotics Control Bureau

14 Jan 2025 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:245
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court granted bail to the petitioner in an NDPS case holding that co-accused disclosure statements are inadmissible without corroboration and the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie link between the petitioner and the recovered contraband.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant NDPS Act bail disclosure statement section 27 Indian Evidence Act

Smt. Geeta & Ors. v. Rajkiya Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya and Anr.

14 Jan 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:236

The Delhi High Court set aside an Industrial Tribunal award rejecting workmen's claim for regularization due to denial of fair opportunity to adduce evidence and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act regularization fair opportunity Industrial Tribunal

Usha Drager Private Ltd & Anr. v. Draegerwerk Aktiengesellschaft & Ors.

14 Jan 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:368

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the trial court's refusal to allow a belated amendment to increase the suit valuation, holding that lack of due diligence and delay after trial commencement justified rejection under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order 6 Rule 17 CPC amendment of pleadings valuation of suit rendition of accounts

M/S Jainsons Westend Pvt Ltd v. S Tarjit Singh & Ors.

14 Jan 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:244

The Delhi High Court upheld the appellate decree allowing a suit for declaration and cancellation of a sale deed without claiming possession, holding that Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act does not bar such suit where possession relief is barred by the Rent Control Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 34 Specific Relief Act Delhi Rent Control Act declaration suit possession

Bilal Ansari v. State

14 Jan 2025 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2025:DHC:185

Anticipatory bail was denied in a dowry harassment case where the accused suppressed remarriage, sold dowry property, and failed to cooperate with investigation, affirming that cruelty under Section 498A IPC includes mental and financial abuse beyond physical injury.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant anticipatory bail Section 498A IPC dowry harassment Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961

M/S Jaiprakash Associates Limited v. M/S NHPC Limited

14 Jan 2025 · Subramonium Prasad · 2025:DHC:226
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking fresh arbitration after setting aside an arbitral award for lack of evidence, holding that the claim was non-arbitrable and referring parties again would be an abuse of process.

arbitration petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 jurisdiction Post-award arbitration Setting aside arbitral award

Gaurav Trehan v. Gurvinder Singh Brar

14 Jan 2025 · Ravinder Dudeja · 2025:DHC:177

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging the trial court's refusal to reopen evidence after a long delay, emphasizing the need for procedural finality and sparing exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227.

civil petition_dismissed Order 18 Rule 17 CPC Article 227 Constitution of India supervisory jurisdiction reopening evidence

Sunil Bailwal v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Another

14 Jan 2025 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2025:DHC:1480

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking quashing of an FIR under Section 498A IPC, holding that disputed matrimonial facts and territorial jurisdiction issues require trial and cannot be decided at the quashing stage.

criminal petition_dismissed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute territorial jurisdiction

Ravi Raj Soulanki v. M/S KRY FOREVER LLP & Ors.

13 Jan 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:136-DB

The Delhi High Court modified an interim injunction restraining use of the mark 'The Crush Coffee', allowing the appellant to use it and seek vacation of injunction on the label mark, emphasizing prior litigation and expeditious adjudication.

civil appeal_allowed Significant interim injunction trademark infringement passing off Order XXXIX CPC

Basanti Lata Jena & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

13 Jan 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:171-DB

The Delhi High Court directed respondents to consider petitioners' claims for notional pay scale benefits as a representation and decide within twelve weeks, limiting retrospective relief to three years prior to petition filing.

administrative other Procedural Notional Monetary Benefits Replacement Pay Scale Service Law Retrospective Benefits

Hemant Kumar Goyal @ Harish Goyal v. Yashwant Jain & Anr.

13 Jan 2025 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2025:DHC:172-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Trial Court to expedite the hearing of the appellant's proposed application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC against a restraint order in a trademark dispute, disposing of the appeal accordingly.

civil appeal_dismissed Procedural Commercial Courts Act, 2015 Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC interim injunction expedited hearing