Delhi High Court

46,428 judgments

Year:

Prashant Luthra v. State

09 Nov 2024 · Amit Mahajan · 2024:DHC:9470
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed charges against the petitioner for alleged sexual offenses, holding that prolonged consensual relationship and lack of specific evidence rendered the charges legally unsustainable at the framing stage.

criminal petition_allowed Significant framing of charge prima facie case Section 376 IPC consent vitiated by misconception of fact

Sandeep Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

08 Nov 2024 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2024:DHC:8682-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging cancellation of a course nomination, holding that cancellation without disciplinary proceedings was lawful given serious doubts about the nomination's authenticity and that the petition was an abuse of court process.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant nomination cancellation disciplinary proceedings preliminary inquiry abuse of process

Monalisa Mohanty v. Union of India

08 Nov 2024 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2024:DHC:8680-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of the petition seeking notional seniority and promotional course attendance for a female police officer, directing re-fixation of seniority and protection of promotion prospects based on respondents’ assurances.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant notional seniority gender parity promotional seniority Assistant Commandant Promotional Course

Shailender Sharma & Ors. v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

08 Nov 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:8658

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Jayant Chaudhary v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

08 Nov 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:8666

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from a minor altercation under Section 528 BNSS following an amicable settlement, emphasizing the court's power to prevent abuse of process in minor offence cases.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 528 BNSS quashing of FIR amicable settlement minor offences

Bharat Ratan & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

08 Nov 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:8664

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce between the parties.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC amicable settlement

Prashant Sharma v. Amit Nehra & Ors.

08 Nov 2024 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2024:DHC:9283
Cites 2 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by adding future prospects and increasing pain and suffering damages while upholding the functional disability assessment.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Permanent Disability Functional Disability Future Prospects

ICONIC IP INTERESTS LLC & ANR. v. SARJU CONFECTIONERY LLP

08 Nov 2024 · Amit Bansal, J. · 2024:DHC:8953

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and damages against a defendant for trademark and copyright infringement and passing off due to use of a deceptively similar mark and packaging, decreeing the suit summarily under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC for failure to contest.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement copyright infringement passing off permanent injunction

Dr. Rich Dhamija v. State NCT Delhi

08 Nov 2024 · Prathiba M. Singh; Amit Sharma · 2024:DHC:8790-DB

The Delhi High Court exercised its parens patriae jurisdiction to appoint a guardianship committee to protect the person and assets of an incapacitated individual under the RPWD Act and Medical Healthcare Act in the absence of statutory guardianship provisions.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant parens patriae jurisdiction guardianship committee person with disability total support

Dr. Rich Dhamija v. State NCT Delhi

08 Nov 2024 · Prathiba M. Singh; Amit Sharma · 2024:DHC:8790-DB

The Delhi High Court exercised its parens patriae jurisdiction to appoint a Guardianship Committee to protect the medical well-being and assets of an incapacitated person under the RPWD Act, 2016 and Medical Healthcare Act, 2017.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant parens patriae jurisdiction guardianship Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 Medical Healthcare Act 2017

Aparna Ashram Society & Anr. v. Mohan Jha & Ors.

08 Nov 2024 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2024:DHC:8649

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a suit filed by a society for lack of a duly authorized representative, emphasizing the necessity of proper representation and adherence to procedural law before adjudicating substantive issues.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant authorized representative juristic person representation Order XII Rule 6 CPC dismissal of suit

M/S MAAN BUILDERS PVT. LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA

08 Nov 2024 · Prateek Jalan · 2024:DHC:8735

The Delhi High Court set aside a two-year debarment order against M/s Maan Builders for failing to provide adequate reasons, emphasizing the necessity of natural justice and reasoned decisions in blacklisting cases.

administrative petition_allowed Significant debarment blacklisting natural justice audi alteram partem

Narendra Kumar Rai v. The Competent Authority, SAFEMA, NDPS Act, New Delhi

08 Nov 2024 · Manmohan, CJ; Tushar Rao Gedela, J · 2024:DHC:8721-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that once forfeiture proceedings under SAFEMA have been conclusively adjudicated up to the Supreme Court, the appellant cannot re-agitate the same issue through writ petitions.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant forfeiture of property SAFEMA Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act

Pradeep Kumar Aggarwal v. Anoop Aggarwal

08 Nov 2024 · Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:8679

The Delhi High Court appointed a substitute Sole Arbitrator after the original arbitrator recused himself, directing arbitration to proceed under DIAC with requisite disclosures under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

other other Sole Arbitrator Substitution Recusal Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Sanjay Bhandari v. Income Tax Office

08 Nov 2024 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2024:DHC:8713
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that prosecution under Section 51(1) of the Black Money Act is independent of assessment proceedings and dismissed the petition seeking quashing of summons and complaint against the petitioner for willful attempt to evade tax through fabrication of documents.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Black Money Act, 2015 Section 51(1) Willful attempt to evade tax Prosecution independent of assessment

Sanjay Bhandari v. Directorate of Enforcement

08 Nov 2024 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2024:DHC:8707

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging proceedings under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, holding that the Enforcement Directorate had valid reasons to believe the petitioner was a fugitive economic offender and the Special Court rightly issued summons.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018 Section 482 Cr.P.C. Black Money Act, 2015 proceeds of crime

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi-11 v. Sangeeta Jain

08 Nov 2024 · Vibhu BakhrU; Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2024:DHC:8650-DB
Cites 7 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court allowed the Revenue's appeal, holding that the AO's assessment order was erroneous due to lack of inquiry, justifying revision under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act for misclassification of agricultural land and denial of capital gains tax.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 263 Income Tax Act erroneous order prejudicial to revenue agricultural land

Jayaswal Necom Industries Ltd. v. Union of India

08 Nov 2024 · Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2024:DHC:8676
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that SAIL and Ministry of Steel are bound by their commitments to supply iron ore to the petitioner under the doctrine of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation, quashing their refusal letters and directing supply as per assurances.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 Section 17A(1A) promissory estoppel legitimate expectation

Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. Union of India & Others

08 Nov 2024 · Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2024:DHC:8674
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner was entitled to relief under the doctrine of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation against arbitrary reservation of mining area for SAIL, allowing the writ petition to be heard despite arbitration clauses and statutory powers invoked by respondents.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant promissory estoppel legitimate expectation mining lease iron ore supply

MS GODAMBARI RATURI v. EMPLOYEE STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.

08 Nov 2024 · Girish Kathpalia · 2024:DHC:8647

The Delhi High Court held that temporary Covid-19 special incentives are not part of wages under the ESI Act, entitling the deceased employee’s widow to benefits under the ESIC Covid-19 Relief Scheme.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Employees’ State Insurance Act Covid-19 Relief Scheme employee definition wages definition