Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Mool Chand v. Krishan Pal
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal to set aside an ex parte order in a commercial suit, emphasizing the need to decide cases on merits where sufficient cause for non-appearance is shown.
Satish Kumar Rohilla v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 287 and 304A IPC based on a voluntary settlement between the accused and the deceased's parents, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.
Neelam Phaugat v. State Govt of NCT Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the Sessions Court's order remanding the matter for fresh hearing on FIR registration under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., affirming the maintainability of revision petitions challenging such orders and the limited scope of interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Vimila Devi & Ors. v. Sanjeev Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by adopting skilled worker wages, adding future prospects, applying correct multiplier, held insurer liable as deceased was carrying own goods, and aligned non-pecuniary damages with Supreme Court precedents.
Sh. Kashmiri Lal Pruthi v. Smt. Ashok Rani
The High Court upheld that the limitation period for a suit challenging a Will under Article 58 of the Limitation Act, 1963 begins from the date the right to sue first accrues upon a clear threat, not from mere knowledge of the Will.
M/S. AERO CLUB v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 49(1), NEW DELHI
The Delhi High Court held that statutory dues payable on a National Holiday and deposited on the next working day are eligible for income tax deduction, overruling the Tribunal's disallowance.
Cross Fit LLC v. Mr Renjith Kunnumal & Anr.
The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and damages to Cross Fit LLC against defendants using the registered trademark "Crossfit" without authorization, restraining further infringement including online use.
M/s Maple Technologies Ltd. v. Topline Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. & Others
The Delhi High Court upheld the summoning order under Section 138 NI Act, holding that defences regarding cheque issuance as security and loan write-back are factual disputes for trial and cannot be decided at the summoning stage.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. C J International Hotels Ltd.
The Delhi High Court condoned delay in refiling income tax appeals but dismissed them as the issues were covered by a prior decision against the revenue, with no substantial question of law arising.
Raminder Singh v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 52(1) New Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act was validly issued within the limitation period after excluding the time allowed to respond under Section 148A, dismissing the petitioner's challenge to the reopening of assessment.
Nitesh Arora and Ors. v. State of Govt of NCT Delhi
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement and mutual divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
Topline Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. & Others v. State & Another
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash the summoning order under section 138 NI Act, holding that disputed issues of repayment and cheque validity are to be decided at trial and that security cheques can be enforced if the underlying debt remains unpaid.
M/s Maple Technologies Ltd. v. M/s Topline Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. & Others
The Delhi High Court upheld the summoning order under Section 138 NI Act, holding that cheques issued as security become enforceable if the loan is unpaid, and defenses on validity and liability are to be examined at trial.
Rakesh Kumar Mohindroo v. Income Tax Officer Ward 59(3) Delhi and Anr
The Delhi High Court directed the Income Tax Officer to provide material supporting allegations of a fictitious loan, allow the petitioner to respond, and hold a personal hearing before framing an assessment order under Section 148A.
Best Crop Science Pvt. Ltd. v. Superintendent, CGST, Delhi West and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a show cause notice issued beyond six months from the seizure or order of prohibition under Section 67 of the CGST Act is not invalid, rejecting the petitioner's limitation challenge.
The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -5 v. Jubilant Energy Kharsang (P) Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal against the ITAT order for AY 2008-09, holding that claims for statutory dues excluded from an NCLT-approved insolvency resolution plan are not maintainable post-approval.
Orion Security Solutions P. Ltd v. DCIT Circle 19 (1) New Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that tax recovery pending appeal cannot exceed 20% of the crystallized tax demand as per the assessment order, including adjustments for TDS and TCS, and directed refund of excess amounts recovered.
Vikas Gupta v. Govt of 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 mutual divorce between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
Shubham Chhillar v. State and Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279, 337, and 338 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties and exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -6 v. Mentor Graphics (India) Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal challenging the Tribunal's exclusion of certain comparables in transfer pricing for AY 2008-09, holding that the Tribunal's factual findings are final and no substantial question of law arises.