Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Bihar Staff Selection Commission v. Himal Kumari
The Supreme Court held that minimum qualifying marks apply only to the written test under the Bihar City Manager Cadre Rules, 2014, and prior executive orders cannot override these statutory rules, thereby allowing a candidate with requisite written test marks but no experience to be considered for appointment.
Momin Moiuddin Gulam Hasan & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that extension of time to file chargesheet solely on the ground of awaiting sanction under UAPA is illegal, entitling accused to default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC.
Huhtamaki India Limited v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that the one-time premium under the ULC Act Government Resolutions can only be charged on surplus exempted vacant land and ordered refund of excess premium paid on the entire land.
Benaifer Vispi Patel v. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Palghar & Ors.
The Bombay High Court quashed a Section 148 notice issued on defective electronic information under the faceless scheme, holding that the Assessing Officer must verify and apply mind before dispensing with procedural safeguards under Section 148A.
Amol Gajanan Kirtikar v. Ravindra Dattaram Waikar
The Bombay High Court held that an election petition lacking a concise statement of material facts demonstrating material effect on election result under Sections 100(1)(d)(iii) and (iv) of the RP Act is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
Devki Nandan Srivastava & Anr. v. Jawaharlal Nehru National Youth Centre & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the transfer of a civil suit to the court where a related suit involving the same parties and property is pending to ensure judicial economy.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 v. Gomantak Eximis Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that income from sale of rural agricultural land is taxable capital gains includible in book profits under Section 115JB, and the ITAT erred in refusing to admit the Revenue's legal grounds on this issue.
M/S CRI LIMITED v. PRAN NATH MEHTA & ORS.
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's refusal to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, holding that the suit for possession and rent recovery is maintainable and not barred by the Delhi Rent Control Act or Commercial Courts Act.
LOREAL INDIA PVT LTD v. RAJESH KUMAR TANEJA TRADING AS INNOVATIVE DERMA CARE AND ANR
The Delhi High Court upheld the registration of the trademark 'CLARIWASH', ruling that a procedural error in the examination report does not invalidate registration absent prima facie grounds of deceptive similarity or statutory violation.
Inder Pal & Ors. v. Jagat Pal
The High Court upheld the Trial Court's dismissal of the application to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, holding that the plaint prima facie discloses a cause of action and factual disputes cannot be decided at this stage.
Anshul Kumar Pal v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 287 and 337 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement and compensation, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process.
Gulfam Khan & Anr. v. The State NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 308/34 IPC following an amicable settlement between parties, holding that inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised to prevent abuse of process in minor offence disputes.
Tarun Sharma & Anr v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of the court's process.
Suman Vijay v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed FIR and proceedings under the Juvenile Justice Act and IPC for minor corporal punishment of a child following an amicable settlement, emphasizing the scope of Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in such cases.
Nipun Padha v. S S TECHNO MARKETING PVT. LTD
The Delhi High Court quashed the Section 138 NI Act complaint against a former Director who had resigned before cheque issuance, holding that the company must be impleaded first and procedural requirements strictly followed.
Veerpal Kaur v. State Bank of India & Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging termination of a probationary officer for failing the mandatory confirmation test post-merger, holding that the termination was lawful under the applicable service rules and terms of appointment.
M/S Krimm Business Solutions Pvt Ltd v. Jagdish Prasad Aggarwal
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order dismissing the petitioner's application to reject the plaint and allowing the plaintiff's amendment to include possession relief, holding that non-joinder of other co-owners was not fatal and the suit was maintainable.
State v. Santosh & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the discharge of four accused for lack of prima facie evidence, affirming the limited scope of interference in charge framing under Section 397 CrPC.
Jawahar Lal & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition of street vendors challenging the no-vending zone declaration at Azad Market, holding that existing no-vending zones remain valid until a new vending plan is prepared under the Street Vendors Act, 2014.
M/S APN SALES AND MARKETING v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court set aside an unreasoned GST tax demand order against a petitioner for availing Input Tax Credit from a supplier with cancelled registration and remanded the matter for fresh consideration after proper hearing.