Delhi High Court

27,673 judgments

Year:

Dimple Verma v. Afasar Ali & Ors.

22 Jan 2026 · Anish Dayal · 2026:DHC:608

Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by recognizing skilled worker wages based on uncontroverted evidence and awarding incidental medical expenses while aligning loss of consortium compensation with Supreme Court norms.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 compensation enhancement minimum wages unorganized sector income proof

Anil Kumar v. Rajeev Mehta & Ors.

22 Jan 2026 · Anish Dayal · 2026:DHC:609

The Delhi High Court enhanced motor accident compensation by assessing 50% functional disability based on actual earning capacity impact, applying skilled wages with future prospects, and awarding prosthetic limb costs.

civil appeal_allowed Significant functional disability assessment loss of earning capacity motor accident compensation prosthetic limb compensation

Union of India & Anr. v. Ex Nc E T Chandra Pal Singh

22 Jan 2026 · V. Kameswar Rao; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2026:DHC:579-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's order granting disability pension to an ex-serviceman, affirming that under the 2008 Entitlement Rules, the burden to disprove service connection lies on the administration and mere classification as a lifestyle disorder is insufficient to deny pension.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Entitlement Rules 2008 armed forces medical board

Mr. Ashvini Kr. JSC v. Sanjay Jain

22 Jan 2026 · Dinesh Mehta; Vinod Kumar

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revenue's appeals holding that the assessment orders were barred by limitation as the reference to foreign tax authorities under the India-Hong Kong treaty was invalid, precluding extension of the limitation period under Section 153(B) of the Income Tax Act.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 153(B) limitation period Foreign Tax and Tax Research Division

M/S Telexcell Information Systems Limited v. M/S Tata Advanced Systems Limited

22 Jan 2026 · Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025 MHC 23675 2009-3-L.W. 580
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court held that the mandate of an arbitral tribunal expired by efflux of time can be extended by the Court under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, upon sufficient cause, and allowed extension of the arbitrator's mandate for six months.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 29A Arbitration and Conciliation Act extension of arbitrator mandate expiry of mandate arbitral proceedings

Union of India v. Z CDR NS Dhami

22 Jan 2026 · V. Kameswar Rao; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2026:DHC:546-DB
Cites 4 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's order granting disability pension for primary hypertension, affirming that the burden to disprove service connection lies on the armed forces and that Medical Boards must provide cogent reasons when denying pension.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant disability pension Entitlement Rules 2008 Release Medical Board presumption of service connection

Genius Electrical and Electronics Pvt. Ltd. v. Servotech Power System Pvt. Ltd.

22 Jan 2026 · V. Kameswar Rao; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2026:DHC:622-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and refused condonation of a 914-day delay in filing against the rejection of a commercial suit for non-payment of court fees, emphasizing the appellant's lack of due diligence and the non-appealability of the recall order.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay Order VII Rule 11(c) CPC non-payment of court fees commercial suit

Union of India & Ors. v. 711829 Ex Sgt Rajkumar Baburao Nanaware

22 Jan 2026 · V. Kameswar Rao; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2026:DHC:599-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the grant of disability pension to an ex-serviceman under the 2008 Entitlement Rules, holding that the administration bears the burden to prove non-attributability of disability to military service and that mere idiopathic classification by the Medical Board is insufficient to deny pension.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension 2008 Entitlement Rules attributability Medical Board

Wilhelmsen Ships Service AS v. Vishal Anand Trading as SBA & Anr.

22 Jan 2026 · Jyoti Singh · 2026:DHC:857

The Delhi High Court allowed a rectification petition to remove a non-used registered trademark SBA in Class 22 under Section 47(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, due to admitted non-use by the registered proprietor.

intellectual_property petition_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 47(1)(b) non-use rectification petition

Yashasvi Havelia v. Prabhtej Bhatia and Anr.

22 Jan 2026 · Jyoti Singh · 2026:DHC:884

The Delhi High Court allowed a rectification petition removing the trademark 'BANDOOK' registered under Class 33 for non-use over five years, affirming that non-use without denial by the proprietor warrants removal under Section 47(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

intellectual_property petition_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 47(1)(b) non-use rectification petition

ISLAM v. THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) DELHI

22 Jan 2026 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2026:DHC:522

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the accused for kidnapping and sexually assaulting a minor girl, holding that the victim's testimony corroborated by medical evidence sufficed despite minor inconsistencies and procedural omissions.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act penetrative sexual assault kidnapping minor Section 232 Cr.P.C. non-compliance

Mannu v. The State (Govt. of NCT) of Delhi

22 Jan 2026 · Chandrasekharan Sudha · 2026:DHC:523

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the accused for sexual assault on a minor based on DNA evidence despite hostile witnesses and procedural lapses, dismissing the appeal.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act Section 376 IPC DNA evidence hostile witness

Parveen Kumar v. Export Inspection Council & Ors.

22 Jan 2026 · Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya; Tejas Karia
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that appointment of a retired public servant as Inquiring Authority under Rule 11(2) of the EIA Rules is permissible, but failure to grant personal hearing under Rule 11(4) vitiates disciplinary proceedings, warranting remand for fresh inquiry.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Disciplinary proceedings Inquiring Authority Retired public servant Rule 11(2) EIA Rules

Mohd. Mustak v. State NCT of Delhi

22 Jan 2026 · Girish Kathpalia · 2026:DHC:545

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the accused in a Section 302 IPC case due to inconsistencies in prosecution evidence and procedural delays, emphasizing that such issues must be tested at trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail Section 302 IPC Section 308 IPC iron rod assault

Abdul Ahad v. State NCT of Delhi

22 Jan 2026 · Girish Kathpalia · 2026:DHC:542

The Delhi High Court granted bail to the accused in a mobile phone snatching case due to non-identification by the complainant and prior bail granted to co-accused.

criminal appeal_allowed bail Section 392 IPC Section 394 IPC Section 34 IPC

Sajan Kumar v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

22 Jan 2026 · Girish Kathpalia · 2026:DHC:538
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court granted bail to a young accused in an NDPS case, holding that insufficient evidence of conspiracy and non-commercial quantity of ganja justified release on bail.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant NDPS Act bail conspiracy commercial quantity

Modassir Kazmi v. Govt. of NCT Delhi

22 Jan 2026 · Girish Kathpalia · 2026:DHC:536

Anticipatory bail was denied to the accused involved in dealing stolen mobile phones with altered IMEI numbers due to the necessity of custodial interrogation and ongoing investigation.

criminal appeal_dismissed anticipatory bail stolen mobile phones IMEI number alteration custodial interrogation

Pali Hills Breweries Private Limited v. Carlsberg India Private Limited

22 Jan 2026 · Jasmeet Singh · 2026:DHC:555

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award granting liquidated damages for delay under a contract clause as a genuine pre-estimate of loss, dismissed most counterclaims, but set aside the rejection of one counterclaim due to contrary evidence.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act Liquidated damages Genuine pre-estimate of loss

GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI v. GAURAV ENTERPRISES

22 Jan 2026 · Jasmeet Singh · 2026:DHC:556

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award awarding payments to a security services contractor, holding that judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is limited and the award was neither illegal nor against public policy.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 judicial interference public policy

Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. Sh Rampal SO Hari Ram

22 Jan 2026 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2026:DHC:565

The Delhi High Court set aside a Labour Court award for lack of territorial jurisdiction as the labour dispute arose entirely outside Delhi.

labor petition_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Labour Court Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 cause of action