Delhi High Court

29,724 judgments

Year:

Devender Kumar Sharma v. Ramesh Arora

28 Nov 2025 · Nitin Wasudeo Sambre; Anish Dayal · 2025:DHC:10581-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld an ex parte decree for recovery of debt, holding that summons sent by registered post and refused by the defendant constitute valid service, and the defendant failed to show sufficient cause to set aside the decree.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant ex parte decree service of summons Order IX Rule 13 CPC presumption of service

OM SAI RAM CATERING v. INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION LTD

28 Nov 2025 · Mini Pushkarna

The Delhi High Court granted a final extension to railway catering contractors to complete base kitchens, restrained IRCTC from acting on termination notices, and emphasized limited judicial interference in contractual disputes.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant contract termination base kitchens Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Letters of Award

Sushma v. Rattan Deep

28 Nov 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:10580-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Family Court's declaration that a marriage was void due to failure to prove customary divorce of a prior spouse under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

family appeal_dismissed Significant customary divorce Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 void marriage Section 5(i) HMA

M/S AGGARWAL HOTELS PVT. LTD. v. ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER & ANR

28 Nov 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:10555

The Delhi High Court held that workmen facing pending disciplinary proceedings cannot be granted protected workmen status, and management may reject such nominations under Rule 61 of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957.

labor appeal_allowed Significant protected workmen Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Rule 61 disciplinary proceedings

Aman Gupta v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

28 Nov 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:10626
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash FIR under POCSO Act, holding that sexual offences against minors cannot be nullified by settlement or subsequent marriage.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant POCSO Act sexual offences against minors quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC

Rameshwar Dayal v. Krishan Singh Panwar

28 Nov 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:10554

The Delhi High Court held that the respondent failed to prove interpolation in the dissolution deed, thereby entitling the appellant to partition of the partnership property as per the deed, and set aside the arbitral award dismissing the claim.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Dissolution deed Interpolation Burden of proof

Amit Sehgal v. Rajesh Sandhyana

28 Nov 2025 · Girish Kathpalia · 2025:DHC:10628

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking permission to file additional documents at the final arguments stage, holding that belated filing without sufficient cause after trial conclusion is impermissible.

civil petition_dismissed filing additional documents Order VII Rule 14 CPC Order XVIII Rule 3 CPC delay in filing documents

The Management of Sh. Moolchand Khairati Ram Hospital and Ayurvedic Research Institute v. Ms. Thresiamma George

28 Nov 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:10559

The Delhi High Court upheld the Labour Court's award declaring dismissal without domestic enquiry illegal, holding that approval under Section 33(2)(b) of the ID Act does not operate as res judicata to bar a subsequent industrial dispute.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Section 33(2)(b) Section 10 res judicata

Pawan Soni v. State (NCT of Delhi)

28 Nov 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:10640

The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant due to unreliable identification and inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony, emphasizing the limited evidentiary value of dock identification without reliable TIP.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant judicial Test Identification Parade dock identification robbery Section 392 IPC

Motor & General Finance Limited v. Director General & Anr

28 Nov 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:10556

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal under Section 82(2) of the ESI Act, affirming that the appellant company is liable for ESI contributions as it failed to prove exemption and no violation of natural justice occurred.

administrative appeal_dismissed Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 Section 82(2) ESI Act Section 75 ESI Act Section 65B Indian Evidence Act

M/S Maharaja Agrasen Hospital v. Tulsi Joshi & Ors.

28 Nov 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:10544

The Delhi High Court allowed the hospital's appeal, setting aside the compensation award due to claimants' failure to prove direct employment and improper shifting of burden of proof by the Commissioner.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 employer-employee relationship burden of proof Section 106 Indian Evidence Act

Virender Singh & Anr. v. Union of India

28 Nov 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:10557

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and refused to condone a 988-day delay in filing, holding that vague financial difficulties do not constitute sufficient cause under the Limitation Act to extend the statutory 90-day appeal period under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act.

civil appeal_dismissed condonation of delay limitation period Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 Section 5 Limitation Act

State of NCT of Delhi v. Dinesh Kumar Jain

28 Nov 2025 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2025:DHC:10560
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against refusal to set aside an ex-parte decree, holding that prolonged inaction and lack of sufficient cause preclude condonation of delay under Order IX Rule 13 CPC and Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant ex-parte decree Order IX Rule 13 CPC condonation of delay Section 5 Limitation Act 1963

The Bhajanpura Co-operative Urban Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. v. The Registrar Cooperative Societies & Ors.

28 Nov 2025 · Nitin Wasudeo Sambre; Anish Dayal · 2025:DHC:10629-DB

The Delhi High Court clarified the registration requirements for mortgage deeds by deposit of title deeds, quashed the Cooperative Tribunal's order for non-application of mind, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

civil other Significant Mortgage by deposit of title deeds Registration Act, 1908 Section 17 Registration Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Arvind v. Union of India & Anr.

27 Nov 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:10121-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed an application to correct a typographical error and formally record the allowance of additional documents in its earlier judgment.

other other Procedural typographical error correction of judgment additional documents procedural order

CSJ Infrastructure Pvt Ltd v. Mr. Akash Kohli & Anr.

27 Nov 2025 · Tejas Karia, J.

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner's rectification petitions and ordered removal of impugned marks identical to the petitioner's prior registered trademark due to mala fide registration and likelihood of confusion.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Rectification petition Prior user rights Mala fide registration

EX. CT/DVR RAJ SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA

27 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:10812-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that dismissal for a serious offence does not automatically bar compassionate allowance under Rule 41 of the Pension Rules, granting relief to a dismissed CRPF constable driver.

administrative petition_allowed Significant compassionate allowance dismissal from service Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 Rule 41

M/S POURING POUNDS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. KUZALIN SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED

27 Nov 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:10819

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate disputes arising from a market agreement containing a valid arbitration clause.

civil petition_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 Section 12(2) Appointment of Arbitrator

Amandeep Singh Proprietor, Guru Kripa Enterprises v. Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 10 (1)

27 Nov 2025 · V. Kameswar Rao; Vinod Kumar · 2025:DHC:10734-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of reassessment notices issued under the amended Income Tax Act provisions, dismissing the petitioner’s challenge to multiple notices and procedural objections.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 148A Income Tax Act reassessment proceedings reason to believe

Master Janmesh Sagar v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

27 Nov 2025 · Jyoti Singh · 2025:DHC:10775

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of selection-based admission tests at Class VI in CM SHRI Schools, holding that Section 13 of the RTE Act prohibits screening only at entry level and such tests do not violate Article 21-A of the Constitution.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 Section 13 RTE Act Article 21-A Constitution of India Admission test