Delhi High Court

58,104 judgments

Year:

Sgt Mritunjay and Sgt Manish Kumar Singh v. Ex MWO Mohammad Yusuf Khan

24 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:10481-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of disability pension for Diabetes Mellitus Type-II, affirming the presumption that disabilities arising during service are attributable to military service unless conclusively disproved by the employer.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Diabetes Mellitus Type-II Armed Forces Tribunal Release Medical Board

Mritunjay and Manish Kumar Singh v. Ramesh Chandra Yadav

24 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 318 (2025) DLT 711
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union of India's petition and upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of disability pension for Primary Hypertension, affirming the presumption that disabilities arising during service are attributable to military service unless rebutted.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Primary Hypertension Armed Forces Tribunal certiorari jurisdiction

Union of India and Ors. v. Ex IIFL Jasbir Singh Panesar

24 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 318 (2025) DLT 711
Cites 3 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the Armed Forces Tribunal's grant of disability pension for Primary Hypertension, affirming the presumption of service connection and the limited scope of certiorari jurisdiction.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant disability pension Primary Hypertension Armed Forces Tribunal Release Medical Board

Oswal Chemicals and Fertilizer v. Union of India & Ors.

24 Nov 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:10509-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the fixation of fertilizer retention price and debt-equity ratio by the expert committee, limiting judicial review and dismissing the appellant's challenge to the pricing methodology and subsidy calculations.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Final Retention Price Provisional Retention Price Debt-Equity Ratio Fertilizer Industry Coordination Committee

Gautam Naug v. Union of India and Others

24 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · 2025:DHC:10474-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of a writ petition as infructuous after the petitioner’s grievance was resolved by intervening circumstances, without adjudicating on the merits.

constitutional petition_dismissed writ petition infructuous petition intervening circumstances disposal of petition

Naresh Bansal and Ors. v. Adjudicating Authority and Anr

24 Nov 2025 · Anil Ksheterpal; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:10341-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging provisional attachment orders under the PMLA, holding that the Directorate had valid reason to believe and that statutory remedies must be exhausted before invoking writ jurisdiction.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Provisional Attachment Order Show Cause Notice Reason to Believe

Rohit v. State (N.C.T. of Delhi)

24 Nov 2025 · Sanjeev Narula · 2025:DHC:10412

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the accused in a dowry death case after holding that the prosecution had not prima facie established cruelty in connection with dowry demand and that prolonged pre-trial detention was unjustified post investigation.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail dowry death Section 304B IPC Section 498A IPC

Cheeli J Ratnam v. Union of India & Ors.

24 Nov 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Om Prakash Shukla · (2019) 174 DRJ 98 (DB)
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the constitutionality of differential retirement ages for Indian Coast Guard officers, distinguishing it from CAPFs and applying Article 33 to validate the classification under Rule 20 of the Coast Guard Rules.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Indian Coast Guard superannuation age retirement age Articles 14 and 16

Pramod Tanwar v. State Election Commission and Anr.

24 Nov 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:10399

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging rejection of a municipal election nomination, holding that such disputes are exclusively triable by election petition under Article 243ZG and relevant statutes, barring interim judicial interference.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant nomination paper rejection Article 243ZG Article 329(b) election petition

Pradeep Kumar Yadav v. Dainichi Consultant Inc.

22 Nov 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025 SCC OnLine Del 3022
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, the court’s role is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator accordingly, leaving validity and arbitrability issues to the arbitral tribunal.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act arbitration agreement prima facie examination competence-competence doctrine

Rajesh Pundhir @ Umesh Pundhir v. State (NCT of Delhi)

22 Nov 2025 · Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:10306

The Delhi High Court dismissed bail for a petitioner accused of sexual assault under the POCSO Act, emphasizing victim protection and risk of witness tampering over liberty claims despite procedural delays and evidentiary discrepancies.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant bail POCSO Act sexual assault pre-trial detention

Irfan v. State

22 Nov 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:10382

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a minor victim's rapist, affirming that credible child witness testimony alone can sustain conviction without corroboration despite minor inconsistencies and delayed reporting.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant child witness testimony rape POCSO Act credibility of victim

Sushant Narang v. M/S Genome Diagnostics Pvt Ltd

22 Nov 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:10495
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, the Court’s role is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator to adjudicate the lease dispute.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 arbitration agreement prima facie examination

Sushant Narang v. M/S Professional Biotech Private Limited

22 Nov 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:10496
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court's role is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator to adjudicate the lease dispute.

other petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 Arbitration agreement Prima facie examination

Sushant Narang v. Sequence Referral Laboratories Pvt Ltd

22 Nov 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:10497

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 after prima facie finding an arbitration agreement in a lease dispute, emphasizing limited judicial scrutiny at this stage.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act arbitration agreement prima facie examination appointment of arbitrator

Staff Selection Commission & Ors. v. Annu

22 Nov 2025 · Navin Chawla; Madhu Jain · 2025:DHC:10407-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing a re-medical examination, emphasizing that medical boards must consider whether a candidate's condition affects duty performance before declaring unfitness.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant medical examination recruitment fitness for appointment judicial interference

Manish Gupta v. M/S Oriental Quarries and Mines Private Limited

22 Nov 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:10595
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, the Court's role is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising from a lease agreement.

civil petition_allowed Significant Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act appointment of arbitrator prima facie existence of arbitration agreement validity of arbitration agreement

M/S BLUSPRING ENTERPRISES LTD v. LOTUS BOULEVARD APARTMENT OWNERS ASSOCIATION

22 Nov 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025 SCC OnLine Del 3022
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11 stage, only a prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement is to be examined and appointed an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes under the Service Agreement.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Appointment of arbitrator Prima facie examination

Sarla Taneja v. Delhi Development Authority

22 Nov 2025 · Vikas Mahajan · 2025:DHC:10355

The Delhi High Court held that DDA must issue a fresh demand-cum-allotment letter after judicial restraint is lifted to grant time for payment, quashing cancellation and forfeiture of earnest money as arbitrary.

administrative petition_allowed Significant demand-cum-allotment letter earnest money forfeiture judicial restraint Delhi Development Authority

Tanmay Mishra; Yash Maheshwari; Krishna; Bethsy v. Dainichi Consultant Inc

22 Nov 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025 SCC OnLine Del 3022
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, the court's role is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act appointment of arbitrator prima facie examination existence of arbitration agreement