Delhi High Court

64,846 judgments

Year:

Ambrish Radheshyam Tiwari v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

09 Feb 2024 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:988-DB

The Court dismissed the habeas corpus petition seeking custody of an adult married woman who voluntarily chose to live with her parents, affirming her personal liberty and autonomy.

constitutional petition_dismissed habeas corpus adult married woman personal liberty illegal detention

State Bank of India v. Asha Enterprises Private Limited

09 Feb 2024 · Prateek Jalan · 2024:DHC:989

The Delhi High Court condoned delay in refiling arbitration challenge petitions but held it lacks pecuniary jurisdiction as claims are below Rs. 2 crores, directing petitions to be filed in the competent District Court.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 petitions Limitation Pecuniary jurisdiction

Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Dabur India Ltd. & Anr.

09 Feb 2024 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2024:DHC:946

The Delhi High Court held that the timelines for filing evidence in trademark opposition proceedings under Rule 50 of the 2002 Rules are mandatory, and failure to comply results in deemed abandonment, but delayed service of evidence does not amount to abandonment if evidence was filed within time.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Rule 50 of Trade Marks Rules, 2002 Opposition proceedings Filing of evidence

Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Dabur India Ltd. & Anr.

09 Feb 2024 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2024:DHC:946
Cites 0 · Cited by 6

The Delhi High Court held that the time limits for filing evidence in trademark opposition proceedings under Rule 50 of the 2002 Rules are mandatory, and failure to comply results in deemed abandonment, but directed the Registrar to decide the opposition on merits given the facts of delayed service.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Trade Marks Rules, 2002 Trade Marks Rules, 2017 Opposition proceedings

Khalid Akhtar v. Union of India and Ors.

09 Feb 2024 · V. Kameswar Rao; Saurabh Banerjee · 2024:DHC:983-DB

The Delhi High Court held that an APAR graded solely by the Initiating Officer without remarks from the Reviewing or Accepting Officer is invalid and quashed the impugned orders accordingly.

administrative petition_allowed Significant APAR grading Initiating Officer Reviewing Officer Accepting Officer

Om Prakash Verma v. National Testing Agency & Anr.

09 Feb 2024 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:1083

The court held that judicial interference with examination answer keys is permissible only in rare cases where the key answer is clearly and demonstrably wrong, and applied this principle to find the NTA's answer key partially incorrect in the UGC-NET exam.

administrative petition_allowed Significant answer key examination judicial interference UGC-NET

Praveen Kumar v. The State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

09 Feb 2024 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:1034-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a Habeas Corpus petition seeking production of the petitioner’s wife after she appeared voluntarily and denied allegations of unlawful detention.

constitutional petition_dismissed Habeas Corpus Article 226 Section 482 CrPC missing person

Krishna Mahto v. State of NCT and Anr.

09 Feb 2024 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:1032-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a major daughter who has voluntarily married has the right to live with her husband and refused to direct police to register an FIR for abduction, dismissing the petition seeking her production.

criminal petition_dismissed missing person major daughter marriage parental rights

Court on Its Own Motion v. Narender Bhutani

09 Feb 2024 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:1025-DB

The Delhi High Court accepted the respondent's unconditional apology for inadvertent contemptuous remarks and discharged him from contempt proceedings, directing no future reference to the withdrawn remarks.

criminal petition_allowed contempt of court unconditional apology discharge from contempt judicial dignity

Anand International and Ors. v. Commissioner of Customs

08 Feb 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:1012-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the adjudication of a Show Cause Notice under the Customs Act must be deferred until disposal of the pending CESTAT appeal, excluding the appeal period from the statutory limitation.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Show Cause Notice Section 28(9) Customs Act, 1962 statutory period CESTAT appeal

Principal Commissioner of Customs v. Tasha Gold Pvt. Ltd

08 Feb 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:1021-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against the Tribunal's order permitting provisional release of gold dore bars imported under a preferential tariff scheme, holding that testing margins and factual circumstances justified the release.

customs appeal_dismissed provisional release gold dore bars preferential tariff scheme margin of error

GS EXIM INTERNATIONAL LLP THROUGH ITS DESIGNATED PARTNER BHAKTI PADA GHOSH v. COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE / (GST) APPEALS-I, THROUGH JOINT COMMISSIONER & ANR.

08 Feb 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:977-DB

The High Court set aside a cryptic GST appellate order for lack of reasoning and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication with a speaking order and personal hearing.

tax appeal_allowed Significant GST refund Order-in-Appeal speaking order input tax credit eligibility

M/S Bharti Enterprises v. Commissioner, Value Added Tax, Department of Trade and Taxes

08 Feb 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:980-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition and remanded the refund application for reconsideration, holding that the COVID-19 related extension of limitation applies to input tax credit refund claims under the CGST Act.

tax appeal_allowed Significant input tax credit refund application limitation period Section 54 CGST Act

Sunil Patil v. The Union of India & Ors.

08 Feb 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:1064-DB

The Delhi High Court held that detention of goods without seizure and issuance of a show cause notice within six months under the Customs Act is impermissible, directing release of gold chains detained beyond the statutory period.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Customs Act, 1962 seizure vs detention show cause notice Section 110

Jaspal Chopra v. M/S Sidhant Polyplast Ltd & Ors

08 Feb 2024 · Shalinder Kaur · 2024:DHC:922

The Delhi High Court upheld the deletion of directors from a summary suit array of parties, affirming that directors are not personally liable absent specific guarantees or fraud, and that parties can be struck out at any stage under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order I Rule 10(2) CPC Order XXXVII CPC leave to defend deletion of parties

State of N.C.T. of Delhi v. Laxmi & Ors.

08 Feb 2024 · Amit Mahajan · 2024:DHC:4217

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order framing charges under Sections 323, 324, 325, 304, and 34 IPC but refused to frame charges under Sections 302 and 307 IPC, holding that the revisional jurisdiction to interfere at the charge framing stage is limited and no prima facie case for murder or attempt to murder was made out.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant revisional jurisdiction framing of charges Section 302 IPC Section 307 IPC

SI Maya Devi v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

08 Feb 2024 · Jyoti Singh, J. · 2024:DHC:2082
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that Sessions Courts cannot direct disciplinary proceedings against police officers, emphasizing judicial restraint and separation of powers, and set aside such directions issued against the petitioner IO.

criminal petition_allowed Significant judicial restraint disciplinary proceedings investigating officer judicial overreach

Sanjay v. Daljeet Kaur Pandey

08 Feb 2024 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2024:DHC:1469-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the tenant's appeal against a decree for possession granted to the landlord under Order XII Rule 6 CPC, holding that the tenancy was validly terminated under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act and the tenant's admissions justified the decree.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC Section 106 Transfer of Property Act month-to-month tenancy judgment on admissions

Guruji Elevators v. Union of India & Ors.

08 Feb 2024 · Subramonium Prasad · 2024:DHC:1217

The Delhi High Court upheld the administrative rejection of the petitioner's claim for Class-I contractor enlistment under CPWD Rules, emphasizing limited judicial interference in tender matters absent mala fide or arbitrariness.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant judicial review Article 226 tender evaluation contractor enlistment

Geneva Laboratories Limited & Anr. v. Mr. Jay Khodiyar & Ors.

08 Feb 2024 · Sanjeev Narula · 2024:DHC:1230

The Delhi High Court granted ex-parte relief to the Plaintiffs against Defendants for trademark infringement and counterfeiting of Bio-Oil products, ordering injunction, seizure, destruction of counterfeit goods, and awarding damages.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement counterfeit goods passing off ex-parte decree