Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Surekhaben Chhaniyabhai Varli v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court held that the authority must pass and communicate a reasoned order on an application for appointment as a notary, and failure to do so violates natural justice and statutory requirements.
Hi Style India Pvt. Limited v. Rakesh Corporation
The Bombay High Court dismissed a belated challenge to an arbitral award, holding that limitation under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is strict and the arbitration agreement in an unsigned invoice was valid.
Sriaanshu Logistics v. Commissioner of Customs (General)
The Delhi High Court upheld the revocation of a customs broker licence for sub-letting and unauthorized use, holding the punishment proportionate and no substantial question of law arising.
M/S VIMAL ELECTRICAL PVT LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF VAT & ANR.
The Delhi High Court directed the tax authorities to decide and pay interest on the VAT refund under section 42 of the Delhi VAT Act or pass a reasoned order denying it within four weeks.
GOVT. NCT OF DELHI THROUGH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION v. REHMAT FATIMA
The Delhi High Court held that a woman employed on a contractual basis is entitled to maternity benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 even beyond the expiry of her contract, dismissing the Government's appeal against such benefits.
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI v. VIRENDER PAL SINGH KULDEEP KUMAR
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing the Government of NCT of Delhi to grant ACP benefits as per the clarificatory OM dated 01.11.2002, holding that adoption of a scheme includes all its clarifications.
M/S ISHERDAS SAHNI & BROS. v. M/S IMPRESARIO ENTERTAINMENT AND HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD.
The Delhi High Court held that the COVID-19 lockdown constituted a Force Majeure event excusing rent payment for April-May 2020, validated the defendant's termination under the lease's Force Majeure clause, and allowed the plaintiff recovery of proportionate rent and charges thereafter.
Rakesh Sachdeva v. Rajesh Sachdeva
The Delhi High Court held that official witnesses summoned solely to produce documents cannot be cross-examined under Section 139 of the Indian Evidence Act, and mere marking of documents as exhibits does not prove their authenticity.
Dharmender Kumar Garg v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's grant of bail to the accused mother-in-law in a dowry death case, emphasizing cautious interference with bail orders and the presumption of innocence.
Pankaj Kumar Sharma v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
Delhi High Court awarded compensation for illegal police detention without due procedure, emphasizing police accountability and constitutional safeguards under Article 21.
Bhai Manjit Singh v. Radhika Chowdhury
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the summoning order under Section 138 NI Act, holding that the defence of stolen cheque requires trial and cannot be decided at the summoning stage.
Om Prakash v. Union of India & Anr
The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a probationary employee for unauthorized absence, affirming that writ courts will not reappreciate tribunal findings absent jurisdictional error.
Vikram Baghel v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that admission rights under the RTE Act are strictly tied to the DoE’s allotment for a specific academic year and cannot be enforced after delay or without fresh allotment, dismissing the petitioner’s claim for admission in a lapsed academic year.
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Mehta & Ors. v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process.
Gopal Krishan v. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal
The Delhi High Court held that under the Delhi Rent Control Act, bona fide requirement for eviction is to be tested as on the petition date and subsequent events cannot be considered in revision proceedings under Section 25B(8), thereby dismissing tenants' applications to admit such events.
Paritosh Sharma v. UTI Infrastructure Technology and Services Ltd & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking enforcement of unimplemented 2006 financial benefit policies, holding such benefits are discretionary and not enforceable rights.
Manish Gupta v. UTI Infrastructure Technology and Services Ltd. & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking enforcement of unimplemented 2006 financial benefit policies, holding that such benefits are discretionary and not vested rights, and mandamus cannot be issued to enforce them.
Shreekant Gupta v. University of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the University's resolution permitting the incumbent Head of Department to continue despite revised seniority, holding that the administrative decision was lawful and not subject to judicial interference absent illegality or mala fide.
Chacha Nehru Bal Chikitsalaya v. M/S Induction Corporate Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that the territorial jurisdiction for setting aside an arbitral award is determined by the agreed seat of arbitration, excluded mediation periods from limitation, and allowed the appeal setting aside the dismissal of the petition as time-barred.
Sapna Dubey v. Central Industrial Security Force
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging medical unfitness for CISF recruitment, holding that courts should not interfere with medical boards' expert decisions absent illegality or arbitrariness.