Delhi High Court

31,999 judgments

Year:

Sunil Yadav v. State, NCT of Delhi

28 Aug 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:7072

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition challenging the trial court's refusal to recall the victim for cross-examination under Section 311 Cr.P.C., holding that no gross error or miscarriage of justice was shown to warrant interference.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 311 Cr.P.C. Section 397 Cr.P.C. Section 33(5) POCSO Act recall of witness

Durgesh Kumar v. The State and Another

28 Aug 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:6711

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from matrimonial disputes following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute mutual consent divorce

Sunil Kumar & Ors. v. State Govt. NCT of Delhi & Anr.

28 Aug 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:7400

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes based on an amicable settlement and mutual divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498A IPC

Prahalad Dutta Lata v. Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd.

28 Aug 2023 · Vibhu BakhrU; Amit Mahajan · 2023:DHC:6314-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner’s liability as guarantor was limited to ₹1.2 crore plus interest and remanded the matter to the DRT to quantify the exact amount payable.

civil petition_allowed Significant Guarantee deed Personal liability Recovery of debts Debts Recovery Tribunal

Amardeep Singh v. The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

28 Aug 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:6655
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash a fraud FIR under Sections 420/34 IPC as an abuse of process, affirming that inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. must be exercised sparingly and not to circumvent prior judicial orders.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR abuse of process bail cancellation

Anzara Alies Bhola & Anr. v. The State of GNCT of Delhi & Anr.

28 Aug 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:6657

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR arising from a neighborly dispute under its inherent powers after the parties amicably settled and the complainant withdrew the complaint.

criminal petition_allowed Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement inherent powers

Kesh Ram Meena & Anr. v. The State & Anr.

28 Aug 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:8008

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003 after the parties amicably settled the dispute and cleared civil liabilities.

criminal petition_allowed Section 482 CrPC Section 135 Indian Electricity Act quashing of FIR amicable settlement

M/S CROCS INC USA v. M/S RELAXO FOOTWEAR LTD

28 Aug 2023 · C. Hari Shankar

The Delhi High Court disposed of suits for infringement of a cancelled design registration as not surviving, reserving liberty to plaintiffs to pursue remedies if their appeal against cancellation succeeds.

civil appeal_dismissed design registration cancellation of design infringement suit Registrar of Designs

M/S BCC-MONALISHA (JV) v. CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED

28 Aug 2023 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2023:DHC:6189
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition for appointment of an arbitral tribunal, holding that the petitioner failed to comply with mandatory pre-arbitral conditions and raised claims exceeding the contractual threshold, rendering the disputes non-arbitrable.

arbitration petition_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement pre-arbitral conditions arbitrability Section 11 Arbitration Act

Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. TP Link Technologies Co Ltd & Ors.

28 Aug 2023 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2023:DHC:6256
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

Delhi High Court directs implementer-defendants to deposit pro-tem security during ongoing FRAND licensing negotiations for Wi-Fi 6 SEPs to prevent unfair advantage and preserve Plaintiff's patent rights.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Standard Essential Patents Wi-Fi 6 FRAND obligations pro-tem security

State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) v. Deelip Kumar

28 Aug 2023 · Tushar Rao Gedela · 2023:DHC:6278

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused, emphasizing the fortified presumption of innocence after acquittal and the insufficiency of prosecution evidence to justify conviction.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant acquittal presumption of innocence oral evidence medical examination

BIRMAJI & ORS. v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

28 Aug 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:6434

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR and criminal proceedings under Sections 341, 323, 324, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement between the parties under its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR settlement agreement amicable settlement

KS Commodities Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Division Connaught Place CGST South

28 Aug 2023 · Vibhu Bakhru; Amit Mahajan · 2023:DHC:6312-DB

Delhi High Court set aside rejection of GST Input Tax Credit refund claim for export of sugar and remanded the matter for fresh consideration of evidence by the Appellate Authority.

tax other Significant Input Tax Credit GST refund zero-rated supplies export of sugar

Pradyumn Ahuja v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

28 Aug 2023 · Amit Bansal · 2023:DHC:6286

The Delhi High Court held that a person facing a pending criminal case is entitled to a ten-year passport renewal subject to court permission for travel, affirming the fundamental right to travel abroad under Article 21.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant passport issuance passport renewal Passports Act 1967 Section 22(a)

HDFC ERGO GENERAL INS. CO. LTD. v. SMT. SHUKNI DEVI & ORS.

28 Aug 2023 · Navin Chawla · 2023:DHC:6243

The Delhi High Court modified a motor accident compensation award by reducing future prospects to 25% and held the insurer entitled to recover compensation from the unlicensed driver.

civil appeal_allowed Significant future prospects motor accident claim compensation driving license

Manish & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

28 Aug 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:6526

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and mutual divorce decree, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498A IPC

Uppal Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Jag Parvesh Sura

28 Aug 2023 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2023:DHC:6328

The Delhi High Court upheld the Sole Arbitrator's order dismissing the petitioner's Section 16 application, confirming that a sole proprietorship is not a separate legal entity and that limitation issues need not be decided at the preliminary stage in arbitration.

arbitration petition_dismissed Significant sole proprietorship partnership firm arbitration Section 16 Arbitration & Conciliation Act

Dhairya Kumar Jindal v. Union of India

28 Aug 2023 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2023:DHC:6233

The Delhi High Court upheld the counselling procedure allowing automatic carry forward of choices in second round admissions, dismissing the petition challenging its legality as neither arbitrary nor illegal.

administrative petition_dismissed counselling process NEET UG 2023 choice filling automatic carry forward

Director General of Foreign Trade v. Horizon Aerospace (India) Pvt Ltd

28 Aug 2023 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Sanjeev Narula · 2023:DHC:6404-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the entitlement of an exporter to MEIS benefits despite intermediary warehousing in an FTWZ, emphasizing the principal export transaction and trade facilitation policy.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Merchandise Exports from India Scheme MEIS scrips Foreign Trade Policy Free Trade Warehousing Zone

Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd v. Lifestyle Equities C V

28 Aug 2023 · Vibhu Bakhru; Amit Mahajan · 2023:DHC:6156-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside an interim injunction restraining use of a polo player device logo, holding that the composite marks are not deceptively similar when viewed as a whole.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement deceptive similarity composite logo polo player device