Delhi High Court
93,075 judgments
SCG Contracts India Pvt. Ltd. v. K S Chamankar Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that summary judgment under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC is discretionary and cannot be granted where disputed factual issues exist, requiring the plaintiff to prove its claims by evidence despite the defendants' failure to file a Written Statement.
Akil Ahmed v. State NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court waived the Rs. 10,000/- cost imposed on the petitioner for recalling a witness, considering his financial incapacity and commitment to avoid trial delays.
Sumit Kumar v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court granted bail to the accused in a rape case citing delay in FIR, consensual relationship, and pending trial, while imposing strict conditions to prevent tampering or intimidation.
Arun Mishra v. The State GNCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking Habeas Corpus for a missing person, directing continued police investigation with monthly status reports to the Magistrate.
Ajayraj Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Central Tax, GST, Delhi, East, New Delhi
The Delhi High Court set aside an order passed without considering the petitioner's reply to a GST show cause notice and directed fresh adjudication after granting personal hearing.
M/S ATSAR EXPORTS PVT LTD v. SUPERINTENDENT OF CUSTOMS AND ANR
The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to inspect, measure, and photograph a seized shawl in the presence of Customs officials, directing the authorities to facilitate such inspection while preserving parties’ rights.
Indian Council of Medical Research v. Vipin Kumar & Anr.
The Delhi High Court directed the Central Administrative Tribunal to reconsider its interim order on alleged factual errors regarding availability of posts, without expressing final opinion, and stayed pressing of a related contempt petition.
Escorts Ltd. v. Bengal Tractors
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award denying pendente lite interest, holding that the arbitrator's reasoned discretion and contract interpretation do not constitute patent illegality warranting interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
Tushar Anand v. Avato Ward 63 State Goods and Service Tax & Anr.
The Delhi High Court directed the GST authority to adjudicate the pending Show Cause Notice proposing cancellation of GST registration within four weeks after personal hearing, without commenting on merits.
M/S USHA INDUSTRIES v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER WARD 82 AND ANOTHER
The Delhi High Court held that retrospective cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2) CGST Act requires objective satisfaction and proper notice, modifying the cancellation date to the date of Show Cause Notice instead of an earlier retrospective date.
AJ Flight Reservations Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West and Anr.
The Delhi High Court directed the tax authorities to dispose of the petitioner’s GST refund claim within two weeks, emphasizing compliance with the statutory 60-day period under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017.
Arvind Sharma v. Superintendent, Range - 115, Central Goods and Service Tax & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that retrospective cancellation of GST registration requires objective satisfaction, proper notice, and reasoned order, and set aside the retrospective cancellation in this case.
Smartadmedia v. Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Service Tax
The Delhi High Court directed expeditious disposal of a delayed GST refund claim within two weeks in accordance with Section 54(7) of the CGST Act and Board Circular guidelines.
M/S L G TRADING HOUSE v. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND TAXES, GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court directed the tax authorities to dispose of the petitioner's GST cancellation application within four weeks, emphasizing timely disposal of such statutory applications.
The Principal Commissioner of Customs, ACC Imports New Delhi v. M/s. Salasar Synthetics
The High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal against reduction of customs fines and penalties on the ground that the appeal amount was below the prescribed monetary limit for maintainability.
Purvanchal Hathkargha Sahakari Sangh Ltd. v. All India Handloom Fabrics Society and Anr
The Delhi High Court held that the Central Registrar has power to appoint an arbitrator under Section 84 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, and where the Registrar fails, the Court can appoint an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, with notice to the Registrar sufficing as notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act.
Guala Closures SPA v. AGI Greenpac Limited
The Delhi High Court held that the Defendant's tamper-evident closure does not infringe the Plaintiff's patent due to fundamental structural and functional differences, and refused interim injunction.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. M/S IJM Corporation Berhad
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award holding that provisional extensions of time were not permitted under the contract and dismissed MCD's challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
BOSCH LIMITED v. M/S GUPTAJEE ENGINEERS & ORS.
The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiff's application to set aside abatement of suit against deceased defendant's legal heirs, condoning delay due to COVID-19 and holding that liabilities of a dissolved partnership survive against legal representatives.
Sukra Logistics v. Emu Lines Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Sukra Logistics partnership firm against a decree for recovery of unpaid invoices, holding that failure to file written statement justified decree under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC and unsubstantiated entity distinction claims were rejected.