Delhi High Court

47,108 judgments

Year:

Central Board of Secondary Education v. St. Columbus School and Anr

12 Sep 2024 · The Acting Chief Justice; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2024:DHC:7066-DB

The Delhi High Court held that natural justice does not always require a personal hearing before withdrawing school affiliation and allowed the appellant to re-inspect the school before passing a fresh order.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant natural justice audi alteram partem personal hearing provisional affiliation

M/S KENT RO SYSTEMS LTD v. BRAND PROTECTORS INDIA PVT LTD

12 Sep 2024 · Rajiv Shakdher; Amit Bansal · 2024:DHC:7064-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a party has the right to confront a witness with relevant documents during cross-examination even without prior disclosure of document details, allowing the appeal and setting aside the trial court's rejection of such application.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VIII Rule 1A(4) CPC Section 151 CPC cross-examination confrontation with documents

Munna v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

12 Sep 2024 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2024:DHC:7060
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held the Municipal Corporation liable for the death of a minor due to negligent maintenance of premises and awarded Rs. 10 lakhs compensation under writ jurisdiction invoking res ipsa loquitur.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant Article 226 constitutional tort compensation negligence

Mr. N K Kantawal, Mr. Satyender Chahar, Mr. Chetan Singh, Ms. Amaya Nair, Ms. Pallak Singha and Ms. Sangeeta Gulati v. Raghav Goel & Anr

12 Sep 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:7055

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's interim appeal challenging a trial court order restraining interference with the defendant's possession in a property access dispute, directing cooperation for expeditious trial.

civil appeal_dismissed mandatory injunction permanent injunction Order XXXIX Rule 1 CPC easementary rights

Shri Nanak Chand v. Jeet Singh and Ors.

12 Sep 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:7054

The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court's discretion to condone delay in filing a written statement in a counter-claim, dismissing the petition for lack of glaring irregularity.

civil appeal_dismissed condonation of delay written statement counter-claim Order VIII Rule 1 CPC

HERO REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

12 Sep 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:7053

The Delhi High Court allowed withdrawal of a petition under Article 227 due to lack of territorial jurisdiction, directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate High Court as per the Supreme Court’s ruling.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Article 227 Constitution of India territorial jurisdiction National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission consumer dispute

Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III v. Dalip Kumar Banthiya

12 Sep 2024 · Yashwant Varma; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:7272-DB

The Delhi High Court held that interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act is payable only up to the admission of a settlement application under Section 245D(1), and the Settlement Commission cannot waive or extend interest liability beyond that date.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Income Tax Settlement Commission Section 234B interest liability settlement application

EX CHAA MOHAMMED ZULKARNAIN v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

12 Sep 2024 · Rekha Palli; Shalinder Kaur · 2024:DHC:7044-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition upholding the Armed Forces Tribunal’s order rejecting the petitioner’s belated request to revoke his unwillingness for deputation and denying re-engagement or pension benefits, holding the claim barred by limitation and not covered by policy.

administrative petition_dismissed unwillingness certificate re-engagement Armed Forces Tribunal limitation

M/s TDI Infrastructure Ltd. v. Birjendra Singh Mallik Since Deceased Thr LR

12 Sep 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:7035
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that petitions under Article 227 challenging NCDRC orders must be filed before the High Court where the original cause of action arose, not merely because the NCDRC is located in Delhi.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Article 227 Constitution of India National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission jurisdiction cause of action

M/S PRADEEP VINOD CONSTRUCTION CO. v. UNION OF INDIA

12 Sep 2024 · Jasmeet Singh · 2024:DHC:7731
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that executing courts have jurisdiction under Section 47 CPC to rectify typographical errors in final arbitral awards and enforce them as decrees, dismissing objections based on misnaming of the decree holder.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitral award enforcement Section 47 CPC Section 33 Arbitration Act Section 36 Arbitration Act

Ms. Chetna Rani and Ors. v. National Capital Territory of Delhi and Anr.

12 Sep 2024 · Jyoti Singh · 2024:DHC:7653

The Delhi High Court quashed a recruitment notice replacing existing contractual nurses with new contractual employees, reaffirming that contractual staff cannot be arbitrarily replaced without regular recruitment as per Supreme Court precedent.

administrative petition_allowed Significant contractual employees replacement of contractual staff right to livelihood Article 21

Ranjit Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi

12 Sep 2024 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2024:DHC:7574

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, holding that mere physical possession of live cartridges without conscious knowledge or criminal intent does not constitute an offence.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 25 Arms Act 1959 conscious possession live cartridges quashing of FIR

Durgawati v. State

12 Sep 2024 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2024:DHC:7526

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking FIR registration, holding that the complaint did not disclose a prima facie cognizable offence supported by evidence to mandate FIR registration under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 200 Cr.P.C. Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. complaint dismissal FIR registration

Renu Promoters Pvt. Ltd. v. Govind Radhe Real Estate Private Limited & Ors.

12 Sep 2024 · Vikas Mahajan · 2024:DHC:7425

The Delhi High Court held that failure to comply with the condition of deposit security under Order XXXVII Rule 3(6)(b) CPC mandates immediate judgment for the plaintiff, and the Court cannot extend time beyond the prescribed period.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XXXVII Rule 3(6)(b) CPC conditional leave to defend summary suit extension of time

Shubham v. State of NCT of Delhi

12 Sep 2024 · Subramonium Prasad · 2024:DHC:7446
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to a petitioner accused under POCSO and IPC for abducting a near-minor girl in a case involving a disputed consensual relationship, emphasizing a balanced approach to bail considering the victim's age and case circumstances.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail POCSO Act minor consent

Singhal Singh Rawat v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax, Delhi-West

12 Sep 2024 · Vibhu Bakhru; Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:7018-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the retrospective cancellation of GST registration for lack of adequate opportunity to the petitioner and directed reconsideration after hearing.

tax appeal_allowed Significant GST registration cancellation retrospective cancellation natural justice show cause notice

M/S BALAJI INDUSTRIES (VIPIN KUMAR) v. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER CGST DELHI NORTH COMMISSIONERATE & ANR.

12 Sep 2024 · Vibhu Bakhru; Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:7049-DB

The Delhi High Court held that GST registration cannot be cancelled retrospectively without prior notice and fair opportunity, modifying the cancellation date to the date of suspension.

tax petition_allowed Significant GST registration cancellation retrospective cancellation Show Cause Notice natural justice

Punjab National Bank v. Niraj Gupta and Anr.

12 Sep 2024 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Girish Kathpalia · 2024:DHC:7214-DB

The Delhi High Court held that gratuity forfeiture under the Payment of Gratuity Act requires a criminal conviction for moral turpitude, and departmental findings alone do not justify forfeiture.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant forfeiture of gratuity moral turpitude Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 criminal conviction

Shri Sunil Kalgounda Patil & Ors. v. Union of India

12 Sep 2024 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Girish Kathpalia · 2024:DHC:7094-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's dismissal of the petitioners' claim for retrospective application of the revised promotion ratio among feeder cadres, affirming that Supreme Court directions do not mandate retrospective implementation when administrative difficulties exist.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant promotion ratio retrospective application Recruitment Rules Group B to Group A promotion

New Ashoka Cooperative House Building Society v. Veena Kumari & Anr.

12 Sep 2024 · The Acting Chief Justice Manmohan; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2024:DHC:7098-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the recall of cancellation of membership and plot allotment in a cooperative society dispute, clarifying that dual membership disqualification applies only to the subsequent membership, not the original.

civil petition_dismissed Significant dual membership cooperative societies membership cancellation Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 1973