Co-Accused Can Apply Separately For Compounding Of Offences Committed By Company Or HUF Under Income Tax Act: Delhi High CourtCase title: Sumit Bharana v. UoICitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 4The Delhi High Court has held that co-accused are entitled to apply separately for compounding of offences committed by a Company or a Hindu Undivided Family under the Income Tax Act, 1961.A division bench...
Case title: Sumit Bharana v. UoI
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 4
The Delhi High Court has held that co-accused are entitled to apply separately for compounding of offences committed by a Company or a Hindu Undivided Family under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela ruled that the co-accused need not await filing of application for compounding by the company or the HUF.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 34
The Delhi High Court has observed that an order for interim maintenance can be granted merely upon the satisfaction of the Court that the application by the wife prima facie disclosed the commission of domestic violence.
“While the veracity of the case of the wife would be tested during the course of trial, interim relief can be granted merely upon the satisfaction that the application by the wife prima facie disclosed the commission of domestic violence,” Justice Amit Mahajan said.
Title: MEENU AGRAWAL v. BHARAT GOEL
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 291
The Delhi High Court has said that while dealing with matrimonial matters, family courts must adopt an approach which is different from ordinary civil proceedings.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 346
The Delhi High Court has observed that a well educated wife with suitable job experience must not remain idle solely to gain maintenance from her husband.
Case title: Shikha Kanwar vs. Rajat Kanwar
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 433
While admonishing a husband for his misbehaviour against his wife's counsel in matrimonial proceedings, the Delhi High Court remarked that lawyers have a responsibility to advise their clients towards resolving the dispute rather than making allegations against the other party. It further remarked that while matrimonial disputes could be frustrating, the litigants cannot misbehave with the opposing counsels.
Title: SACHIN GAUR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 437
The Delhi High Court has observed that in the proceedings under the Domestic ViolenceAct, the examination in chief of a witness can be tendered by way of an affidavit.
Title: SAISHA CHHILLAR MINOR REPRESENTED THROUGH HER MOTHER MS. JYOTI CHHILLAR v. THE DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 518
The Delhi High Court has observed that a school cannot deny transfer certificate to a child merely because the parents have ongoing matrimonial or guardianship dispute.
“…the school cannot deny the issuance of Transfer Certificate (TC) to the child who has sought admission in other school. In the event of delay in issuance of Transfer Certificate, even a disciplinary action can be taken against the Head-Master or In-Charge of the school. Needless to say that in a matrimonial or guardianship dispute, it is the interest of the child which is of paramount consideration,” Justice Vikas Mahajan said.
Case title: Praveen Kumar v. Pooja Arya
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 542
The Delhi High Court has held that a wife cannot be denied maintenance merely because she is qualified and was employed, if she was compelled to quit to take care of the child.
Title: SH. VINEET GUPTA v. SMT. BHAWNA GUPTA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 608
The Delhi High Court has ruled that maintenance m is not a favour but is a recognition of shared parental responsibility, and of the child's right to be supported.
Title: NK v. K
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 725
Distinguishing between interim maintenance and ad-interim maintenance, the Delhi High Court has held that the latter can be granted without filing of a specific application by the concerned party and is payable from the date of the order passed by the Court and not from the date of filing of maintenance application or petition.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that Court can grant ad-interim maintenance to alleviate the hardship of the claimant, pending its decision on the grant of interim maintenance and determination of its quantum.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 734
The Delhi High Court has observed that the dignity of a dependent wife and child is denied when the financial support is delayed by the husband, underscoring that even a day's lapse defeats the very purpose of maintenance.
“The very object of maintenance is defeated if its disbursal is left at the convenience of the earning spouse. Financial support delayed is dignity denied, and this Court is conscious of the fact that timely maintenance is integral to safeguarding not only subsistence but the basic dignity of those who are legally entitled to such support,” Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 798
The Delhi High Court has observed that the Domestic Violence Act does not distinguish between a first or subsequent marriage for the purpose of entitlement to maintenance.
Self-Declared Information On Matrimonial Site Not Admissible Proof Of Income: Delhi High Court
Title: A v. B
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 799
The Delhi High Court has observed that any “self-declared information” made on a matrimonial portal, without verification or corroborative evidence, cannot be treated as reliable or admissible proof of income.
Case title: AS v. NKS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 839
The Delhi High Court has upheld a family court order dissolving the marriage of a couple on the grounds that the wife had subjected the husband to cruelty by making derogatory complaints to his employer.
A division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Renu Bhatnagar observed that marriage requires adjustment and parties may take a long time to adjust with each other but both husband and wife are expected to show due respect to each other.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 846
The Delhi High Court has observed that a highly qualified wife, who is unemployed, has a right to be supported and managed by the husband till the time she is able to get gainful employment or develop the source of income.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna rejected a husband's plea challenging a family court order directing him to pay Rs. 1 lakh ad-interim maintenance monthly to the wife.
Case title: Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited & Ors v. Mr Siddhartha Mukherjee
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 898
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the role of the Central Information Commission constituted under the Right to Information Act 2005 is to ensure transparency and disclosure of information by a public authority, and not make policy prescriptions.
Case title: PJ v. PJ
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 911
The Delhi High Court has held that Section 22 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, which bars publication of details of matrimonial disputes, is not absolute.
Case title: NJ v. AJ
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 922
Observing that it is not uncommon for husbands to suppress their real income in order to avoid paying maintenance to their wives, the Delhi High Court has held that a wife can seek to summon bank officials as witness to the husband's actual income/ assets.
Case title: YV v. VV
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 936
The Delhi High Court denied interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act to a woman, citing her estranged husband's financial incapacity.
“Respondent should not be burdened with the obligation to provide interim maintenance, particularly when his own financial, physical and emotional conditions are visibly strained,” a division bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar observed.
Title: GEETA SHARMA v. KANCHANA RAI & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 996
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a daughter-in-law, who becomes a widow after the demise of her father-in-law, is entitled to claim maintenance from the estate derived from his coparcenary property.
Title: A v. B
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1005
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a woman has no right to residence under Section 17 of the Domestic Violence Act after the marriage is dissolved by way of a divorce unless a contrary statutory right is shown to exist.
Case title: Ankush Kumar Parashar v. Sapna @ Mona & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1043
The Delhi High Court, while reducing the quantum of maintenance granted to a man's wife and child, took into consideration his financial obligations like home loan and responsibility towards his parents.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1054
The Delhi High Court has ruled that rise in the income of the husband, coupled with the significant increase in his cost of living, constitute a “clear change in circumstances”, warranting enhancement of the amount of maintenance to the wife.
Title: SG v. DG
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1077
The Delhi High Court has said that a wife cannot be denied maintenance merely because she files an application for such a relief only after the husband files a divorce petition.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1078
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the presumption of a valid marriage is not diminished simply because there is no direct or positive proof of the ceremony of Saptapadi having taken place between the parties.
Case title: MV v. DS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1106
The Delhi High Court upheld a family court order taking into account two years old Income Tax Returns of a husband, an advocate by profession, to determine his financial capacity to pay maintenance to his wife.
Title: RAJ KAMAL YADAV & ANR v. SMT. MANJU YADAV & other connected matter
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1112
The Delhi High Court has quashed a summoning order passed against a husband's distant relatives while rapping the wife for roping them in the matrimonial dispute, without any cogent evidence.
Title: POOJA RASNE @ PUJA RASNE v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1131
The Delhi High Court has observed that it is the duty of Courts to prevent harassment of individuals having no substantial involvement in the alleged matrimonial cruelty.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1138
The Delhi High Court has observed that a wife's “persistent and pressurising conduct” to sever the husband's bonds with his family certainly amounts to cruelty and is a ground for divorce.
Title: AMIT SETHI v. LALIT SETHI & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1139
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the property of a father who dies intestate devolves on his son in his individual capacity and not as the “Karta” of his own family.
Title: SHELLY MAHAJAN v. MS BHANUSHREE BAHL & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1156
The Delhi High Court has held that a civil suit by a spouse claiming damages from the other spouse's lover for intentionally interfering with the marriage is maintainable. The High Court discussed the novel concept of "Alienation of Affection" to hold that such an action is maintainable.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1171
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a wife's repeated absence from the matrimonial home and subsequent institution of multiple complaints against the husband and his family members amounts to cruelty.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1182
The Delhi High Court has observed that cordial exchanges between a husband and a wife cannot be equated with a bona fide attempt to restore matrimonial life.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1192
The Delhi High Court has ruled that separate petitions by husband and wife seeking dissolution of their marriage cannot be converted to a petition for “mutual consent” divorce under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act.
Title: RAHUL SAHNI v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1200
The Delhi High Court has observed that cruelty in the matrimonial homes robs women of their dignity, underscoring that fight against social evils like dowry and domestic violence is far “from over.”
Title: UMAR HARIS v. YUSRA MERAJ & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1231
The Delhi High Court has observed that a divorced wife is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 or CrPC, it respective of the ground or the manner of divorce.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1301
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a marriage between two individuals cannot be declared as invalid on the ground that it was never solemnized as per Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Case title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1347
The Delhi High Court has held that questioning husband's legitimacy by calling him bastard and making reprehensible allegations against his mother constitute matrimonial cruelty, a ground for divorce.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1397
The Delhi High Court set out the key principles to be followed while determining maintenance to the wife and child, while also calling for reasoned orders by Family and Mahila Courts in the national capital.
Title: ARVIND BHATNAGAR v. STATE & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1408
The Delhi High Court has observed that a matrimonial FIR cannot be quashed if the settlement agreement between the estranged couple is not executed.
Delhi High Court Allows Couple To Proceed With Surrogacy Despite Husband Crossing Statutory Age Bar
Title: TAPAS KUMAR MALLICK & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1419
The Delhi High Court has permitted an intending couple to move ahead with surrogacy procedure, despite the husband being above the maximum age limit prescribed under the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1427
The Delhi High Court has observed that judicial estimation is must where there is no direct proof of income of the parties for the purpose of grant of maintenance in matrimonial cases.
Mere Taunts, Family Friction In Ordinary Marital Life Not Cruelty: Delhi High Court
Title: SHASHI ARORA & ANR v. STATE THROUGH COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1433
The Delhi High Court has observed that mere taunts, casual references and general family friction occurring in ordinary wear and tear of marital life is not sufficient to constitute the offence of cruelty.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1559
The Delhi High Court has observed that a wife's belated criminal allegations cannot detract from or outweigh the husband's consistent evidence of sustained cruelty meted out to him.
Woman's Right To Shared Household Not License To Indefinitely Occupy In Laws' Home: Delhi High Court
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1687
The Delhi High Court has held that a woman's right to shared household under Section 17 of the Domestic Violence Act is a right of protection and not a right of ownership or a licence to indefinitely occupy premises of the in-laws, especially when such occupation causes demonstrable harm to senior citizens.
Case title: SK v. RR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1692
The Delhi High Court upheld the divorce decree granted by the Family Court in favour of a husband, on finding that the marriage remained unconsummated from inception and that the Appellant-wife's conduct amounted to mental cruelty.
Stridhan, Gifts Not Source Of Income To Defeat Wife's Claim For Maintenance: Delhi High Court
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1718
The Delhi High Court has ruled that stridhan, inherited property or gifts received by a wife from her parents or relatives cannot be construed as a source of income so as to defeat her claim for maintenance from the husband.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1729
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the one year separation period required as a pre-requisite for presenting the first motion for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act is not mandatory and can be waived.
Working Mothers Can't Be Forced To Exhaust Themselves While Fathers Evade Responsibility Of Child: Delhi High Court
Case title: HM v. RM
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1802
The Delhi High Court has “outrightly rejected” the argument that a working mother seeking maintenance for her minor children reflects misuse of maintenance laws or a sense of entitlement, holding that courts must recognise the dual burden borne by custodial mothers and ensure that fathers do not evade their parental responsibilities.