Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Dilip Puri v. State N.C.T. of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court restored bail to the petitioner, holding that bail cancellation was unjustified after chargesheet filing and emphasizing that custodial interrogation alone cannot warrant bail cancellation in a primarily civil dispute involving alleged forgery.
Sanjay v. State (GNCT) of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and sentence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act based on the reliable testimony of a five-year-old victim and her mother, dismissing the appellant's challenge on grounds of inconsistencies and lack of medical evidence.
Commissioner of Customs (Air) Chennai-VII Commissionerate v. M/s Redington (India) Limited
The Delhi High Court upheld that customs duty exemption applies to Wireless Access Points using solely MIMO technology, interpreting 'MIMO and LTE products' conjunctively in the exclusion clause.
Commissioner of Customs Air Chennai-VII Commissionerate v. M/S. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that the phrase "MIMO and LTE products" in the customs exemption notification applies only to products combining both technologies, thereby allowing exemption for WAPs using solely MIMO technology.
DCIT, Circle-25(1), New Delhi v. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's decision that Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act does not apply to electricity generation companies prior to its 2012 amendment, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-9 v. M/s Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld that Section 115JB MAT provisions did not apply to electricity companies for AY 2006-07 due to inapplicability of Companies Act accounting requirements prior to the 2012 amendment.
Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Beetal Teletech Limited
The Delhi High Court held that the phrase "MIMO and LTE products" in the customs exemption notification applies only to products combining both technologies, thereby allowing exemption for WAPs using solely MIMO technology.
Qamar Jahan v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court directed the CBIC to reconsider and update the Baggage Rules, 2016, to balance preventing gold smuggling with protecting bona fide travellers from harassment, while upholding Customs' authority to confiscate undeclared jewellery beyond prescribed limits.
Bhura Singh @ Kunal v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of the accused in a murder case, holding that serious offences with sufficient evidence warrant denial of bail pending trial.
Shubham Jain v. Poonam Arora & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the contempt petition as respondents complied by passing a speaking order refusing release of the sale deed with reasons, allowing the petitioner to challenge that order via a substantive petition.
Raj Rani v. Naresh Kumar
The Delhi High Court dismissed a contempt petition against DDA for alleged non-compliance with possession orders, holding the petitioner failed to comply with court directions and thus was not entitled to relief.
APTEC Advanced Protective Technologies AG v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that an arbitral tribunal's decision dismissing discovery applications which conclusively decided a substantive issue qualifies as an interim arbitral award and is challengeable under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Taekwondo Federation of India v. Indian Olympic Association
The Delhi High Court directed the Taekwondo Federation of India to conduct limited fresh selection trials with wild card entries to ensure fair participation of excluded athletes in the upcoming National Games.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Vijender Singh & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld a motor accident compensation award, ruling that absence of a driving license alone does not establish contributory negligence and affirmed the sole negligence of the offending vehicle's driver.
Rinku @ Gajendra v. Shyambir Pathak
The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation to an injured pillion rider by setting aside contributory negligence deduction and granting future prospects as per Supreme Court precedent.
Gensol Electric Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. v. Mahindra Last Mile Mobility Limited
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's interim injunction application in a trademark dispute, holding that the defendant's modified mark with a house mark is not deceptively similar and there is no likelihood of confusion given the plaintiff's lack of market presence.
DCIT, CIRDE-25(1), New Delhi v. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's decision that Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 does not apply to electricity generation and distribution companies for AY 2007-08, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.
Sh. Tarif Singh & Ors. v. Delhi Development Authority
The Delhi High Court quashed a non-reasoned DDA order and directed reconsideration with a reasoned and speaking order to enable effective statutory appeal.
Parikshit Grewal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the interim order making the recruitment process subject to the outcome of the Tribunal's Original Application, directing expeditious hearing without binding the Tribunal to its observations.
Raj Singh v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to decide the petitioner's pending representation under Rule 29 of the CRPF Rules within six weeks, disposing of the writ petition accordingly.