Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Shailendra v. Deputy Director (LM) (South Zone-II) & Anr
The Delhi High Court directed possession of acquired land to DDA in accordance with the Supreme Court's final judgment, holding that post-acquisition representations for denotification are not maintainable.
Rajiv Channa v. Union of India
The High Court held that acquittal in the predicate scheduled offence negates the existence of proceeds of crime, rendering attachment proceedings under PMLA unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
Rahul Darbari v. Arun Kumar Khobragade & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court's refusal to allow a belated application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall the complainant as witness and place documents on record in a cheque bouncing case, emphasizing judicial discretion, prevention of trial delay, and the need for timely evidence production.
Babu Lal v. The State NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court granted bail to an accused implicated peripherally in an illegal sex determination case, holding that custodial interrogation was unnecessary and pre-trial detention should not be punitive.
Monu @ Jiji v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court granted furlough to a life-convict prisoner with good conduct and verified residence, emphasizing the rehabilitative purpose of furlough under prison rules.
Jai v. Directorate of Education & Anr
The Delhi High Court held that unaided private schools are bound to admit EWS/DG students as per the Directorate of Education's seat fixation and computerized draw of lots, and unfilled EWS seats can be carried forward to the next academic year.
Mohd Shakir v. Gopal Traders and Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking rectification of a copyright registration, holding that the petitioner was a person aggrieved but failed to prove the registration was wrongly made, emphasizing procedural compliance and estoppel principles.
Hansraj Tiles World v. Commissioner of DGST Delhi & Ors.
Delhi High Court held that retrospective cancellation of GST registration requires objective reasons and opportunity to the taxpayer, modifying cancellation date to the petitioner's application date.
Surinder Kumar Garg v. The Union of India
The Delhi High Court set aside a tax demand order for failing to consider the taxpayer's detailed reply and remitted the matter for re-adjudication with a fresh opportunity of hearing.
Anita Bansal Proprietress of M/s A.B. Enterprises v. The Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte GST demand order passed without hearing the petitioner who was prevented from responding due to her husband's death, and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after affording opportunity of hearing.
Rouse Avenue Bar Association v. The Bar Council of Delhi & Anr
The Delhi High Court held that the right to form an association under Article 19(1)(c) does not guarantee recognition as a Court annexed Bar Association, upheld the Bar Council of Delhi's refusal of recognition due to membership irregularities, and recognized the Central Delhi Court Bar Association as the official Bar Association for the Rouse Avenue District Court Complex.
Sadhna Kohli v. Sales Tax Officer Class II, Avato Ward 80 & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that retrospective cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2) CGST Act requires objective satisfaction and proper notice, and modified the cancellation date to the date of the Show Cause Notice instead of an earlier retrospective date.
Babu Lal v. Ashok Kumar
The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction order under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, ruling that the landlord's bona fide requirement was established and the tenant failed to raise a triable issue for leave to contest.
Mukesh Kumar v. The State NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 34 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act following an amicable settlement and resumption of cohabitation between the parties.
Subhash Sharma v. The State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of the Court's process.
Sukhvidner and Ors. v. The State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC in a matrimonial dispute following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of court process.
Mohd. Nasim v. State NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and modified sentences of two accused for robbery under Sections 394/34 and 411 IPC, holding that minor contradictions and non-recovery of weapon do not vitiate the prosecution case when recovery of stolen property and identity are established.
National Highway Authority of India v. M S SSANGYONG ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION CO. LIMITED
The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award treating the payment certificate as a final statement, dismissed the petition challenging it, and reaffirmed the limited scope of judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
Chander Bhalla v. Rajeev Bhatnagar
The Delhi High Court allowed the defendant leave to defend a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC, holding that triable issues regarding the authenticity of the loan agreement and nature of the transaction preclude summary judgment.
Ssangyong Engineering and Construction Co. Ltd. v. National Highway Authority of India
The Delhi High Court disposed of the petition challenging the arbitral award's rejection of interest on delayed payment, noting the award had already been set aside and remanded, leaving the petitioner liberty to raise the issue before the arbitral tribunal.