Delhi Court April 2026 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Asif Khan @ Samir vs State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Apr-29-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ BAIL APPLN. 1166/2026 ASIF KHAN @ SAMIR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Tushar, Advocate (through videoconferencing).versusSTATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIAORDER% 29.04.20261. The accused/applicant seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.458/2025 of Police Station Gandhi Nagar for offence under Section 21/29 NDPS Act.2. Learned counsel for accused/applicant seeks permission to withdrawthis application because accused/applicant stands arrested.3. As requested, the bail application is dismissed as withdrawn.GIRISH KATHPALIA, JAPRIL 29, 2026/drThis is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2026 at 11:56:45...
Public Works Department Education West Division (N) Through Executive ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHIDate of decision: 29.04.2026 + O.M.P. (COMM) 111/2024PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT EDUCATION WESTDIVISION (N) THROUGH EXECUTIVE ENGINEER.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Lalltaksh Joshi and Ms. Minu Kumari, Advocates.versusM/S TEWATIA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITEDTHROUGH ITS DIRECTOR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Avinash Trivedi, Mr. Rahul Aggarwal and Mr. Rhythem Nagpal, Advocates.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHANSHANKAR% JUDGEMENT (ORAL)HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.1. The present Petition has been filed under Section 34 of theArbitration and Conciliation Act, 19961, seeking to challenge the Arbitral Award dated 25.10.2023, as corrected on 13.11.20232, rendered by the learned Arbitrator, Mr. Kamlesh Kumar (Former ADG, CPWD), in arbitral proceedings titled M/s Tewatia Construction Private Limited and Union of India.2. By way of the Impugned Award, the Public WorksDepartment [PWD] (Government of NCT...
M/S Nutech Roofings (Through Its Proprietor Mr. Kailash Chand) vs Comm ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 4282/2026 & CM APPL. 20876/2026M/S NUTECH ROOFINGS (THROUGH ITS PROPRIETORMR. KAILASH CHAND) .....Petitioner Through: Dr. Prabhat Kumar and Mr. Karan Kanwal, Advs.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CGST, DELHIEAST AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Akash Panwar, JSCCORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBREHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAULORDER% 29.04.20261. The challenge is to the impugned Order-in-Original dated 19thDecember 2025 whereby the penalty of Rs. 2,42,97,395/- was imposed under Section 122 (1) (vii) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter, CGST Act) and also penalty of Rs. 2,30,69,375/- under Section 122 (1) (ii) of CGST Act.2. It is the case of the petitioner that the aforesaid order preceded withthe Show Cause Notice dated 19th June 2025 which was duly replied by the petitioner on 30th June 2025. According to him, another Show Cause Notice in the matter of cancellation of ...
Gaya Prasad @ Kalu vs the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Apr-29-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ BAIL APPLN. 1162/2026 & CRL.M.A. 13359/2026 GAYA PRASAD @ KALU .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mandeep Kumar Sharma, Advocate.versusTHE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for State with Mr. Gaurav Bisht and Ms. Ankita Bisht, Advocates.CORAM:HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMAORDER% 29.04.20261. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, at this stage,does not pres the present application and seeks permission to withdraw the same with liberty to approach the learned Session Judge concerned since FSL report has been filed and thereafter, he has filed the present application before this Court.2. In view of the above, the present application along with pendingapplications, if any, stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the learned Sessions Judge concerned.3. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, JAPRIL 29, 2026/v...
Rajiv Swarup Pathak & Anr. vs Rakesh Kumar Malhotra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CS(OS) 225/2026, I.A. 7294/2026 & I.A. 7295/2026 RAJIV SWARUP PATHAK & ANR. .....Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Vandana Bhatnagar, Adv.versusRAKESH KUMAR MALHOTRA .....Defendant Through: Mr. Dinesh Garg and Ms. Rachna Agrawal, Advs.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJANORDER% 29.04.2026I.A. 11949/2026 (joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC)1. The captioned suit was filed by the plaintiff praying for decree ofspecific performance with regard to agreement to sell dated 29.12.2025.2. During pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived atsettlement, terms whereof have been incorporated in para 4 of the application. The application has been signed by the plaintiffs, as well as, the defendant. Further, it is also supported by affidavits of parties.3. I have gone through the terms of the settlement, the same are found tobe lawful, therefore, there is no impediment for decreeing t...
Sh. Badshah & Anr. vs Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Reserved on : 27.04.2026Pronounced on : 29.04.2026Uploaded on : 29.04.2026+ FAO 86/2021SH BADSHAH & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Rohit Nagar, AdvocateversusUNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Subhash Tanwar, SPC for UOI with Mr. Sandeep Mishra, Mr.Harshit Deshwal, Mr. Mohit Kumar Tomar and Mr. Mayank Sehrawat, AdvocatesCORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRIJUDGMENT1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 23 of the RailwayClaims Tribunal Act, 1987 against the judgment dated 05.12.2019 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Claim Application No. OA/II(U)/GZB/228/2018, titled as Badshah & Anr. vs. Union of India.2. Vide the impugned judgment, the Tribunal dismissed the claimprimarily on the ground that the incident in question was not an untoward incident within the meaning of the Railways Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to...
FIVE9 Technologies India Private Limited vs Regional Director & Anr.
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Apr-29-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 3799/2026 FIVE9 TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Arunav Guha Roy, Ms. Radhika Yadav, Mr. Sheedhar Kale, Mr. Priyanshu Jain and Ms. Sakshi Dutta, AdvocatesversusREGIONAL DIRECTOR & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Vijay Laxmi, CGSC for ROC/RDMs. Ruchi Singh Adv for Mr. Vijay Pal SinghCORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYALORDER% 29.04.20261. Pursuant to order dated 24th March 2026, Ms. Vijay Laxmi, CGSCappearing for Regional Director (RD)/Registrar of Companies (ROC), states on instructions that they shall take decision in accordance with law relating to plea of petitioner for taking on record Form DIR-12 bearing SRN AA1475850 dated 27th February 2023.2. The concerned authority Regional Director (RD)/Registrar ofCompanies (ROC) shall consider and take decision within a period of four weeks from today.3. It is reiterated that the Cour...
Bhanwar Singh Rajawat vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Apr-29-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 4398/2026 & CM APPL. 21450/2026 BHANWAR SINGH RAJAWAT .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ayush Gupta and Ms. Aditi Aggarwal, AdvocatesversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Kapil Dutta, Standing Counsel for MCDCORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSALORDER% 29.04.20261. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction torespondent-MCD to take action against the unauthorised construction on the first floor, second floor and the third floor of DDA LIG Flat No.A-5B/96B, Janakpuri, New Delhi, being carried out by respondent No.2.2. Mr. Kapil Dutta, standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-MCD on advance notice, submits that demolition order was passed against the subject property by MCD on 24th July, 2025. Against the said order, the respondent no.2 had filed an appeal before the appellate Tribunal, MCD (ATMCD), being Appeal No.316/2026 titled as Geerish Ahuj...
Rajeev Aggarwal vs Union Ofindia & Ors.
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Apr-29-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 4008/2026 & CM APPL. 19613/2026, CM APPL. 19614/2026 RAJEEV AGGARWAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajeev Sharma, AdvocateversusUNION OFINDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Kshitij Chhabra, SPC with Mr. Abhijit Vikram Singh Advocate for R-1/UOIMr. Pranay Mohan Govil, SSC with Ms. Priya Katare, Advocate for R-2 toR-4CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBREHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAULORDER% 29.04.20261. Heard.2. The challenge in the present petition is to the impugned Order-in-Original dated 24th June, 2025 arising out of the Show Cause Notice (FORMDRC-01).3. The impugned order dated 24th June, 2025, notes that thepetitioner/noticee did not reply to the DRC-01A, but petitioner did reply to the show cause notice (DRC-01) and vide impugned order passed by the respondent no.4, petitioners claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC) has been disallowed and recovery of the said ITC amount was ...
Ganga Ram Sharma vs Smt. Shashi Jain
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Apr-29-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CM(M) 640/2026 & CM APPL. 19221/2026 GANGA RAM SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhan Mohan, Ms. Tanisha Bhatia, Ms. Anjali Chaudhary and Mr. Daksh Sehgal, Advs. alongwith Petitioner-in-person.versusSMT. SHASHI JAIN .....Respondent Through: None.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTAORDER% 29.04.20261. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition hasbecome infructuous, as the warrant of arrest issued vide impugned order has been executed. It is therefore prayed that the present petition be disposed of as withdrawn.3. Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for thepetitioner, the present petition is disposed of as withdrawn. Pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of.RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, JAPRIL 29, 2026/sds/ikThis is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified fr...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »