Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
M/S Yash Fans and Appliances Ltd v. M/S Ottomate International Private Limited
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court must refer disputes to arbitration if a valid arbitration agreement exists and the petition is timely, without examining the merits of the dispute.
Cdr Seema Chaudhary v. Union of India and Others
The Supreme Court directed a fresh, stand-alone consideration of the petitioner’s Permanent Commission application in strict adherence to its prior binding judgment, rejecting the tribunal’s grouping with later batches and allowing a one-time proportional vacancy increase.
Brahmaputra Concrete Pipe Industries v. Assam State Electricity Board
The Supreme Court held that the Registrar cannot refuse registration of curative petitions solely because the review petition was dismissed in open court, emphasizing that maintainability must be judicially determined by a Bench, not administratively by the Registry.
The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) v. M/s. B. Arunkumar Trading Ltd.
The Bombay High Court held that payments for storage tanks do not constitute rent under Section 194I of the Income Tax Act, and TDS on such payments is deductible under Section 194C, dismissing the Revenue's appeals.
Gufran Suleman Qureshi v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
The Bombay High Court held that the Municipal Corporation cannot arbitrarily refuse further redevelopment permissions based on unchanged road width after initially granting permission, applying promissory estoppel, legitimate expectation, and principles of administrative law.
Samita Rajendra Patil v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a coordinate bench order permitting bridge construction, holding that allegations of fraud and suppression of facts were unsubstantiated and the proper remedy was review or appeal, not collateral writ petition.
Shrikant Chimaji Jahagirdar v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court acquitted a public servant accused of corruption, holding that demand and acceptance of illegal gratification must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, and mere circumstantial evidence without direct proof is insufficient.
~ v. ~
The Bombay High Court upheld MHADA's No Objection Certificate and the SRA's authority in a slum redevelopment dispute, dismissing petitions challenging redevelopment orders and emphasizing no fundamental right to trespass on public land.
Bahar Infocons Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai-2 & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that the Commissioner’s revisional powers under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act can be exercised to rectify inadvertent double taxation errors even after the time limit for filing revised returns has expired, allowing the petitioner’s revision applications.
Bahar Infocons Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai-2 & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that the Commissioner has revisional powers under Section 264 to rectify bona fide mistakes in income tax returns even after the time limit for filing revised returns has expired, allowing the petitioner’s revision applications for correction of double taxation of excess bonus provisions.
Bahar Infocons Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai-2 & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that the Commissioner has wide revisional powers under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act to rectify bona fide mistakes even after the time limit for filing revised returns has expired, and set aside the rejection of the petitioner’s revision applications on this ground.
Raj Kumar Batra v. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)
The Delhi High Court held that interest is payable on the entire refundable redemption fine and penalty amount retained by Customs, quashing the corrigendum that limited interest to the statutory pre-deposit amount.
M/S HARI DASHAN SEVASHRAM PVT. LTD. v. M/S PAUL SALES PVT. LTD.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the defendant's amendment application and the plaintiff's application for judgment on admission, holding that running account entries do not constitute clear admissions and amendments introducing irrelevant claims are impermissible.
Sunil Sethi v. M/S Hero Fincorp Ltd.
The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award due to invalid unilateral appointment of the sole arbitrator barred under Section 12(5) read with the Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Shri Naresh Kumar
The Delhi High Court upheld that compassionate allowance under CCS Pension Rules is discretionary and can be granted to dismissed employees with less than 10 years of service, dismissing the Government's challenge to its withdrawal.
SIBA INTERNATIONAL v. UNION BANK OF INDIA & ANR.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking to restrain possession of secured assets under SARFAESI Act due to the petitioner's default on payment undertakings and allowed the bank to proceed with recovery.
Bhuvaneshwari Subramanian v. University Grants Commission
The Delhi High Court held that the UGC cannot disqualify a candidate from JRF after a final declared UGC-NET result, and advisory eligibility criteria cannot be treated as mandatory, affirming the petitioner's entitlement to JRF based on her interdisciplinary M.Phil. qualification.
IFUNA CO-OPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETIES LTD. v. THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a cooperative society membership granted in 1986, ruling that no domicile requirement existed under the applicable law then, and dismissed the review petition challenging this decision.
Anurav Jaju v. State of NCT Delhi & Anr.
Anticipatory bail was denied to accused in a serious economic offence involving forged loan documents and fund diversion, as custodial interrogation was necessary to protect investigation integrity.
Meena Devi & Anr. v. The State GNCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court directed the wife's relatives to refrain from interfering in the matrimonial home and disposed of the Habeas Corpus petition seeking release of minor children, facilitating family reconciliation.