Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Vijay Gupta
The Supreme Court held that subsequent purchasers have no locus to challenge land acquisition lapsing under Section 24(2) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, and set aside the High Court's order declaring acquisition lapsed.
Delhi Government v. Vijay Gupta & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that unauthorized possession of government land is not protected as deemed possession under Section 24(2) of the Delhi Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 2013, and set aside the High Court's judgment allowing the suit based on such possession.
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Vijay Gupta
The Supreme Court held that subsequent purchasers have no locus standi to challenge land acquisition or its lapsing under the 2013 Act and set aside the High Court's declaration of deemed lapse.
Central Excise Commissioner, Mumbai v. Morarji Gokuldas SPG and WVG Co. Ltd.
The court held that recovery of wrongly refunded excise duty after setting aside a refund order under Section 35E does not require a separate demand notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai – 1 v. M/s. Morarjee Gokuldas Spg. & Wvg. Co. Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that recovery of erroneously refunded excise duty under Section 35E does not require a separate notice under Section 11A if the refund order is set aside within the prescribed time, overruling contrary High Court rulings.
केंद्रीय उत्पादन शुल्क आयुक्त v. मेसर्स मोरारजी गोकुळदास एसपीजी आणि डब्ल्यूव्हीजी कं. लि.
The Supreme Court held that no separate Section 11A notice is required for recovery of erroneously refunded excise duty once the refund order is set aside under Section 35E, affirming the binding precedent in Asian Paints (India) Ltd.
Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai – 1 v. M/s. Morarjee Gokuldas Spg. & Wvg. Co. Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that recovery of erroneously refunded excise duty under Section 35E does not require a separate notice under Section 11A if proceedings under Section 35E are initiated within time, overruling contrary High Court and Tribunal decisions.
Sandeep v. Balmohan Vidyamandir Trust
The Bombay High Court held that a teacher holding a two-year D.Ed. qualification is entitled to seniority in Category 'C' from the date of acquiring a B.A. degree, setting aside the School Tribunal’s order and directing consequential benefits.
Ahlcon Public School v. Directorate of Education
The Delhi High Court directed the Directorate of Education to decide a school’s fee increase application within four weeks, failing which the school is entitled to a 15% automatic fee hike.
Bhagat Singh v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr
The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition directing the Land & Building Department to reconsider the petitioner's application for allotment of an alternative plot after submission of requisite documents and grant an opportunity of hearing.
Smt. Gindori v. Consolidation Officer
The Delhi High Court directed the Consolidation Officer to dispose of the petitioner's representation regarding land dispute expeditiously following a prior remand order.
Savita Sardana v. Satish Paul & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed objections claiming ownership by adverse possession in execution proceedings, holding that mere permissive possession without hostile assertion is insufficient to establish title against a registered owner.
Loreal India Pvt. Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar Taneja Trading as Innovative Derma Care and Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to cancel the trademark "CLARIWASH", holding that registry errors do not invalidate registrations and that the marks in dispute are not deceptively similar.
South Delhi Municipal Corporation v. B N Magon
The Delhi High Court held that professional services by advocates from residential premises do not constitute taxable business activity under the DMC Act, dismissing the MCD's appeal against quashing of property tax demand.
Master Prakalp Sharma v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed a single parent to apply for a US passport for her minor child subject to the father's consent and conditions safeguarding parental rights and child welfare amid ongoing custody disputes.
Sandeep Aggarwal v. Union of India
Delhi High Court set aside the maximum compounding fee imposed under the Customs Act for a first-time offender and remanded the matter for reconsideration after partial payment.
M/S ERNST AND YOUNG LIMITED v. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, CGST APPEALS -II, DELHI AND ANR.
The Delhi High Court held that professional services rendered by Ernst & Young's Indian branch to overseas entities are not intermediary services and qualify as export of services, entitling the petitioner to input tax credit refund.
Intech Brinechem Limited v. DE Dietrich Process Systems India Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, holding that adherence to ICA Rules is not mandatory absent mutual consent, thereby facilitating arbitration despite procedural objections.
Anil Kumar Goel v. Rekha Goel
The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner is a proper party to the rent recovery suit and allowed his impleadment by setting aside the trial court's dismissal of the application under Order I Rule 10 CPC.
Bhavya Cerations v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that writ petitions challenging show cause notices under Section 4 of the Public Premises Act are not maintainable and directed petitioners to file replies and exhaust statutory remedies before the Estate Officer.