Delhi High Court
103,150 judgments
F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG & Anr. v. Natco Pharma Limited
The Delhi High Court allowed correction of a clerical error in the name of Senior Counsel in its earlier order, issuing a corrigendum accordingly.
INFO EDGE (INDIA) LIMITED v. PRADEEP NAMDEO & ANR.
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and quashed the registration of the mark "NAUKRIYAN" holding it deceptively similar to the well-known trademark "NAUKRI" and likely to cause confusion among the public.
NVENIA LLC v. Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks
The Delhi High Court set aside the Registrar's order rejecting the trademark application as abandoned for non-appearance without prior notice of objections, emphasizing the requirement of natural justice and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.
HEINEKEN ASIA PACIFIC PTE. LTD v. VIJAY KESHAV WAGH
Delhi High Court expunged respondent’s copyright registration for an artistic work copying petitioner’s TIGER logo due to procedural lapses and deceptive similarity under the Copyright Act, 1957.
9312275287) v. VIKAS CO OP GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD AND ANR
The Delhi High Court quashed orders ceasing the petitioner's cooperative society membership based on her brother's disqualification, restoring her rights after nearly 20 years of possession and allotment.
Through: Mr. Akshay Ringe, Ms. Megha Mukerjee, Mr. Suyash Darade, Mr. Ravi Sharma Advocates v. JUDO FEDERATION OF INDIA AND ORS
The Delhi High Court directed the Judo Federation of India to conduct elections and amend its constitution in compliance with the National Sports Governance Act, 2025, ensuring orderly transition to a democratically elected governing body.
Through: Mr. Atul Kumar, Mr. Ashutosh Kumar & Mr. Aatrayi Das, Advs v. JASWINDER SINGH & ORS
The Delhi High Court permitted a lessee to surrender leased premises and be discharged from further rent liability due to the Managing Partner's severe medical incapacity, subject to conditions including peaceful possession and clearance of dues.
Mob: 9810149006 Email: sehgalbhuvanesh@gmail.com v. LATE SH RAMESH CHAND SHARMA AND ORS. .....Judgement Debtors
The Delhi High Court clarified that a valid relinquishment deed by a co-owner effectively transfers their share, modifying the distribution of sale proceeds in execution of a final property decree.
Through: v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
The court held that third parties dispossessed in execution of Rent Controller decrees have a statutory remedy under Order XXI Rule 99 CPC to challenge such dispossession before the Executing Court.
Through: Ms. Ritika Mitra, Adv v. STATE BANK OF INDIA & ANR
The Delhi High Court held that summons served via email and WhatsApp constitute valid service, and dismissed the appellant's delayed appeal against an ex parte decree in a commercial suit for want of condonation of delay.
Through: Mr. Vikas Sethi, Mr. Chitresh Mittal and Ms. Vaishali Chaudhary, Advocates v. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking appointment of arbitrator due to an inordinate delay of over two years in re-filing without credible justification, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural timelines and the necessity of bona fide explanations for condonation of delay.
Through: Mr. Rishi Bansal, Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Ms. Shruti Manchanda, Mr. Vibhor Sethi and Mr. Mankaran Singh, Advs v. CHACHA CLOTH HOUSE
Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and granted interim injunction restraining respondent from using the mark "CHACHA CLOTH HOUSE," holding that the dominant feature "CHACHA" in both marks creates a prima facie case of trademark infringement.
Through: Mr. Shivanshu Bhardwaj, Adv v. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS
The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a constable and refusal of compassionate allowance under Rule 41 of the CCS Rules, emphasizing that such allowance is discretionary and cannot be granted absent special consideration.
M/S RCC INFRAVENTURES LTD. & ORS v. M/S. DMI FINANCE PVT. LTD. & ORS
The Delhi High Court held that a substitute arbitrator can be appointed under Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration Act after recusal, rejected contempt proceedings against the petitioners, and imposed costs for conduct causing delay.
Through: Mr. K.S. Rana with Mr. Pradeep Kumar and Mr. S.S. Rawat, Advocates with v. STATE GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ANR
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial discord following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
Agrawal and Mr. Abhisek Singhvi, Advs v. ACIT CIRCLE 60(1) NEW DELHI
The Delhi High Court upheld the denial of deduction for duty drawback under Section 80-IC but remanded the matter to allow deduction of excise and customs duties paid on raw materials from duty drawback, ensuring consistent tax treatment.