Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
OYO HOTELS AND HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED v. DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
The Delhi High Court held that withholding of tax refund under Section 241A requires detailed, written reasons and prior approval, and mere issuance of scrutiny notice does not justify withholding refund.
Lokesh Kumar Arya v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to consider and extend old pension scheme benefits to the petitioner if eligible, following binding precedents and applicable pension rules.
MODI-MUNDIPHARMA PVT. LTD. v. PREET INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD & ANR.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for trademark infringement and passing off, holding that the defendant's mark FEMICONTIN is not deceptively similar to the plaintiff's descriptive mark FECONTIN-F, and that the plaintiff failed to prove infringement or passing off.
Rajeev Kumar v. Prem Chand
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the appellate court’s dismissal of the appeal and upheld valid service of summons on the defendant’s brother, emphasizing limited supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 and distinct civil standards of proof.
Shri Deepak Gupta v. Regional Director CBSE
The Delhi High Court directed CBSE and the school to provide a scribe and extra time to a Class 12 student suffering from a psychosomatic neurological disorder for her board examinations.
Ramola Bhuyan v. Max Healthcare Institute Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed Defendant No. 1's application to be deleted from the suit in a medical negligence case, holding that the issue is triable and cannot be decided without recording evidence.
Shankar Shyamnaval Mishra v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court directed the Ministry of Civil Aviation to constitute the Appellate Committee within two weeks and allowed the petitioner to file an appeal against his designation as an unruly passenger, extending the limitation period accordingly.
Ajay Kumar Jindal v. Superintendent, Ward 71, Central Goods and Services Tax, Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that GST registration cannot be cancelled ab-initio where the business existed and directed reconsideration of refund of accumulated input tax credit, setting aside retrospective cancellation from registration date.
Maya Devi v. Manoj Kumar and Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court's decree for specific performance of a sale agreement where the plaintiffs proved the contract, part payment, and readiness to pay balance consideration, rejecting the defendant's loan claim and procedural objections.
Naveen Arora v. High Court of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a judicial officer for accepting sponsored hotel stays from a stranger, affirming limited judicial review in departmental inquiries and the applicability of strict conduct standards for judicial officers.
M/S Feedback Energy Distribution Company Limited v. RBL Bank Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed expeditious disposal of appeals against an ex-parte interim order that restrained the petitioner company's functioning and curtailed fundamental rights, emphasizing prompt adjudication to prevent prejudice.
SML LIMITED v. SULPHUR CROP CARE PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.
The Delhi High Court decreed a patent infringement suit based on an amicable settlement under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC, binding the parties to undertakings acknowledging patent validity and non-infringement.
Mohammed Isham v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the CISF authorities to consider the petitioner’s representation for promotion before constituting the Departmental Promotion Committee, ensuring procedural fairness.
Union of India v. Arvind M Kapoor and Anr
The Delhi High Court held that the RTI Act prevails over the Anti-Dumping Rules and directed disclosure of the basis of initiation of anti-dumping investigations, subject to justified confidentiality.
Azad @ Gaurav v. State of GNCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld convictions for dacoity under Section 395 IPC based on witness testimony, recoveries, and CDR evidence, rejecting appellants' challenges on identification and procedural grounds.
Shri Chandra Shekhar Jha & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to decide the promotion proposal of petitioners within two months and conduct the Departmental Promotion Committee within three months if eligible, disposing of the writ petition accordingly.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 v. M/S Alcatel Lucent India Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order deleting reassessment additions, holding that reassessment cannot be initiated on information already available on record and requires new material under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
Manavi Anusha v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed the Look-Out Circular against the petitioner, holding that LOCs must only be issued where the accused evades arrest or trial, and that cooperation with investigation and pending arbitration do not justify its continuation.
MS Ranjita Betarbet v. Subir Banerjee
The Delhi High Court held that dismissal of an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC cannot be challenged under Article 227 but only by revision under Section 115 CPC, dismissing the writ petition accordingly.
Lintas India Pvt Ltd v. Bharatiya Kamgar Sena Praphulban
The Bombay High Court held that under Section 50 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions Act, the Industrial Court can compute and order recovery of wages due under a prior order but cannot determine entitlement, and modified the interest rate awarded on delayed payments.