Delhi High Court

58,104 judgments

Year:

Awanish Chandra Mishra v. Delhi High Court through its Registrar General & Anr.

04 Dec 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:10829-DB

The Delhi High Court held that an employee voluntarily accepting a lower post is entitled to pay protection only in the Pay Band and not the higher Grade Pay of the previous post, dismissing the petitioner’s claim for higher Grade Pay fixation and related benefits.

service_law petition_dismissed Significant pay fixation Grade Pay Fundamental Rules 22(B) Fundamental Rules 15(a)

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION v. SURYA PRAKASH MISHRA

04 Dec 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:10824-DB

Termination of a probationer based on verified allegations of submission of fabricated documents is punitive and requires adherence to principles of natural justice including opportunity of hearing before dismissal.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant termination of probationer Rule 5(1) Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules stigmatic termination Article 311(2) Constitution of India

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Bhairvi Kumari & Ors.

04 Dec 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:10823-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT order recognizing 'Sangeet Prabhakar' as equivalent to a Bachelor Degree in Music, dismissing the petition challenging appointment of respondents as Primary Teachers (Music) in KVS.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant equivalence of qualification Sangeet Prabhakar Bachelor Degree in Music Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan

CCS COMPUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

04 Dec 2025 · The Chief Justice; Tushar Rao Gedela; Devendra Kumar Upadhya... · 2025:DHC:10848-DB

The Delhi High Court held that while blacklisting for document fabrication is justified, the two-year debarment period was disproportionate and reduced considering mitigating factors and time already served.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant blacklisting debarment public procurement doctrine of proportionality

M/S Somya Garments v. Shyam Kishore Mishra

04 Dec 2025 · Anish Dayal; Nitin Wasudeo Sambre · 2025:DHC:10786-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decree for recovery of Rs.11,85,701/- with interest, holding that the appellant failed to prove alleged deductions and adjustments due to lack of credible evidence and cross-examination.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant recovery of money burden of proof cross-examination commercial suit

Devinder Kumar Choudhry v. Rambir Singh

04 Dec 2025 · Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:10802

The Delhi High Court upheld the tenant's leave to defend in an eviction petition, holding that the landlord must specifically prove bona fide requirement and adequately explain non-utilization of alternative vacant premises.

property petition_dismissed Significant bona fide requirement eviction petition Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 alternative accommodation

Jagdish Singh Chauhan v. Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

04 Dec 2025 · Nitin Wasudeo Sambre; Anish Dayal · 2025:DHC:10836-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of the petitioner's appeal against the arbitral award by the Delhi Cooperative Tribunal, affirming the applicability of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and limiting writ interference with factual findings.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 A&C Act Article 226 Constitution of India

Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation-1, New Delhi v. Clifford Chance Pte Ltd

04 Dec 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar · 2025:DHC:10838-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's ruling that a non-resident legal advisory firm did not constitute a service or virtual permanent establishment in India under the India-Singapore DTAA due to insufficient physical presence and actual service rendering, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant service permanent establishment virtual service permanent establishment India-Singapore DTAA Article 5(6)(a)

Rajesh @ Raju v. State

04 Dec 2025 · Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:10846
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the rape conviction based on credible testimony of a minor prosecutrix but modified the sentence to the period already served considering mitigating factors.

criminal appeal_partly_allowed Significant rape prosecutrix testimony corroboration minor victim

ITC Limited & Anr. v. Adyar Gate Hotels Limited

04 Dec 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:10842
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

Delhi High Court refused interim injunction in trademark infringement suit due to lack of territorial jurisdiction, emphasizing the need for purposeful targeting and tangible apprehension of future infringement.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction interim injunction trademark infringement passing off

Trans Asian Industries Expositions Pvt Ltd v. M/S G S Berar and Co Pvt Ltd & Anr.

04 Dec 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:10841

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court’s dismissal of belated amendment applications to written statements after trial commencement, emphasizing the requirement of due diligence under Order VI Rule 17 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order VI Rule 17 CPC amendment of pleadings due diligence trial commencement

Shantanu Saha v. Union of India and Ors.

04 Dec 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025: DHC:6812-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed the GSFC conviction and sentence of a BSF constable for sexual harassment due to procedural irregularity in failing to produce available CCTV evidence, holding it violated the right to a fair trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant GSFC trial Border Security Force Act, 1968 Article 226 Constitution of India fair trial

Mapsa Tapes Private Limited v. Shiv Naresh Sports Private Limited

04 Dec 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:10835

The Delhi High Court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff for Rs. 16.77 crores based on clear admissions of liability by defendant no.1, rejecting the defense of contingent payment under an escrow agreement.

civil appeal_allowed Significant summary judgment Order XIII-A CPC Order XII Rule 6 CPC admission of liability

Naeem Ahmed v. Sheeba Mehfooz

04 Dec 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:10800

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging refusal of interim injunction in a suit involving a disputed gift deed, holding that relief must be sought in the pending appeal against the dismissal of the original suit.

civil appeal_dismissed interim injunction gift deed possession mutation

Sunil Kant v. Samrat Chander & Ors.

04 Dec 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:10813

The Delhi High Court upheld probate of a Will excluding one son, holding that the Will was validly executed and the appellant failed to prove prior sale or vitiating circumstances.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant probate Indian Succession Act, 1925 validity of Will burden of proof

Stanlee (India) Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commissioner of CGST, Delhi North

03 Dec 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:10978-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Refund claims cannot be rejected on grounds of alleged excess Input Tax Credit without issuance of a Show Cause Notice under Sections 73 or 74 of the CGST Act, and withholding refunds without following due process is illegal.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Input Tax Credit Refund rejection Show Cause Notice Section 73 CGST Act

Dhruv Mittal v. Commissioner of Customs

03 Dec 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:10844-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Customs Department to comply with its order releasing detained goods without delay, emphasizing that unfiled appeals cannot justify non-compliance and imposing costs for delay.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs Department detained goods release of goods court order compliance

Brij Lal v. Union of India

03 Dec 2025 · Nitin Wasudeo Sambre; Anish Dayal · 2025:DHC:10879-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging a land acquisition award on grounds of res judicata, holding that compensation under the 2013 Act is not available after possession was taken post-dismissal of earlier writ petitions.

property petition_dismissed Significant Land Acquisition Res Judicata Constructive Res Judicata Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013

Dr Neha Parashar v. National Board of Examination and Anr

03 Dec 2025 · Jyoti Singh, J. · 2025:DHC:11326

The Delhi High Court upheld the cancellation of a medical trainee's registration for prolonged unauthorized absence, emphasizing strict adherence to Leave Rules and deference to academic authorities in training matters.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant DNB Leave Rules Unauthorized absence Cancellation of registration Natural justice

Manisha Sharma and Anr v. M/S Olive Exim Pvt. Ltd.

03 Dec 2025 · Saurabh Banerjee · 2025:DHC:11280

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction order under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, affirming the landlord’s title and bona fide requirement, and held that prior permission under the Slum Areas Act was not necessary.

property appeal_dismissed Significant eviction petition Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 bona fide requirement adverse possession