Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Gannon Dunkerley and Company Limited v. Union of India Ministry of Road Transport and Highways
The Delhi High Court held that filing writ petitions challenging contract termination does not waive the right to arbitration and appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, leaving all jurisdictional and merit issues to the arbitral tribunal.
M/S RG REFINERIES PVT. LTD. v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (GROUP III), NEW DELHI
The Delhi High Court quashed the denial of duty-free tariff preference due to non-consideration of updated certificates of origin and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.
M S Abhay Traders v. Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax and Another
The Delhi High Court held that retrospective cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2) CGST Act must be based on objective satisfaction with proper reasons and opportunity, modifying cancellation to the date of proprietor's death instead of an earlier retrospective date.
Rajat Kapoor v. Commissioner, State Tax, GST, Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that retrospective cancellation of GST registration requires objective satisfaction and proper notice, modifying the cancellation date to the proprietor's death date instead of an arbitrary earlier date.
M/S D S S BUILDTECH PVT LTD v. MANOJ KAYAL
The Delhi High Court set aside the NCDRC's order directing 100% deposit for stay, holding that only 50% or Rs. 35,000 deposit is permissible under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act and remanded the matter for reconsideration.
Dr Shashi Bhushan v. University of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that a vacancy arising from resignation after appointment is a fresh vacancy requiring fresh advertisement and cannot be filled from the waiting list.
Sant Bhagwan Baba Shikshan Mandal v. Gunwant
The Supreme Court upheld the entitlement of a non-teaching employee to appointment as Shikshan Sevak upon acquiring requisite qualifications under amended statutory provisions, directing appointment with compensation and confirming the High Court's judgment.
Samaj Parivartana Samudaya v. State of Karnataka
The Supreme Court held that revised returns filed post suspension of mining are inadmissible for payment claims, refund of guarantee money depends on full R&R Plan implementation, and mining lease categorization cannot be reopened, affirming its exclusive jurisdiction over related disputes.
Union of India & Anr. v. Jahangir Byramji Jeejeebhoy
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's refusal to condone a 12-year delay in restoring a dismissed writ petition, emphasizing the necessity of sufficient cause and judicial restraint in condonation applications.
Sarfaraz S. Furniturewalla v. Afshan Sharfali Ashok Kumar
The Bombay High Court held that hardship or rehabilitation allowances paid as 'transit rent' during redevelopment are capital receipts not subject to TDS under Section 194(I) of the Income Tax Act, and interest on amounts withdrawn from the Small Causes Court is at that court's discretion.
Shilpa Santosh Salvi v. Pankaj Shobhnath Yadav & Ors.
The Bombay High Court upheld the validity of a caste certificate issued by the Mumbai Suburban authority, ruling that jurisdiction depends on residence at the relevant deemed date and that the certificate was lawfully issued after due scrutiny.
M/s. Sateri Builders and Developers LLP v. Slum Rehabilitation Authority
The High Court upheld the AGRC’s order setting aside the acceptance of an incomplete slum redevelopment proposal that excluded eligible occupants, emphasizing strict compliance with statutory consent and procedural requirements under the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act.
Zainab Rafiullah Shaikh v. Puthenveedu Joseph Mathew
The Bombay High Court upheld the appointment of a Court Receiver over disputed commercial premises, dismissing the appellant's challenge that the appointment was unjustified and confirming that a trespasser cannot resist such appointment by invoking equitable tests.
Sar Senapati Santaji Ghorpade Sugar Factory Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court held that an application filed before retrospective amendments barring such applications is a vested right and cannot be invalidated, quashing eligibility restrictions imposed by CBDT notifications beyond statutory provisions.
M. H. Patel v. Virendra Babubhai Dalal
The High Court held that de novo trial under Section 326 CrPC does not apply to verification under Section 202 CrPC and remanded the matter for reconsideration without requiring fresh verification, clarifying that offences under Section 500 IPC are not triable summarily.
‘K’ Savakash Auto Rickshaw Sangha v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court upheld the validity of additional fees levied under the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 for delayed applications, holding such fees are authorized regulatory fees under Section 211 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and not penalties.
Sharad Devidas Shelke v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the disqualification of a candidate for incorrectly stating his educational qualification in the recruitment application, emphasizing the candidate's responsibility for accuracy and refusing to disturb the completed selection process.
The New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Promila Prabhakar
The Delhi High Court upheld compensation based on UK minimum wages for a British national deceased in a motor accident, holding the registered owner and insurer jointly liable despite unregistered vehicle transfer and rejected insurer's plea of non-liability due to permit and policy transfer issues.
Shiv Raj Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court set aside the discharge of accused in a criminal case involving alleged forged transfer of company shares, holding that the trial court must consider the chargesheet and investigation material rather than relying solely on NCLT orders at the charge framing stage.
Guriqbal Singh v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that upgraded below benchmark ACRs must be considered retrospectively for promotion and seniority restoration, quashing the denial based on a DoP&T OM applicable only prospectively.