Delhi High Court
29,724 judgments
Savita Sardana v. Satish Paul & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed objections claiming ownership by adverse possession in execution proceedings, holding that mere permissive possession without hostile assertion is insufficient to establish title against a registered owner.
Loreal India Pvt. Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar Taneja Trading as Innovative Derma Care and Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to cancel the trademark "CLARIWASH", holding that registry errors do not invalidate registrations and that the marks in dispute are not deceptively similar.
South Delhi Municipal Corporation v. B N Magon
The Delhi High Court held that professional services by advocates from residential premises do not constitute taxable business activity under the DMC Act, dismissing the MCD's appeal against quashing of property tax demand.
Master Prakalp Sharma v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed a single parent to apply for a US passport for her minor child subject to the father's consent and conditions safeguarding parental rights and child welfare amid ongoing custody disputes.
Sandeep Aggarwal v. Union of India
Delhi High Court set aside the maximum compounding fee imposed under the Customs Act for a first-time offender and remanded the matter for reconsideration after partial payment.
M/S ERNST AND YOUNG LIMITED v. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, CGST APPEALS -II, DELHI AND ANR.
The Delhi High Court held that professional services rendered by Ernst & Young's Indian branch to overseas entities are not intermediary services and qualify as export of services, entitling the petitioner to input tax credit refund.
Intech Brinechem Limited v. DE Dietrich Process Systems India Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, holding that adherence to ICA Rules is not mandatory absent mutual consent, thereby facilitating arbitration despite procedural objections.
Anil Kumar Goel v. Rekha Goel
The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner is a proper party to the rent recovery suit and allowed his impleadment by setting aside the trial court's dismissal of the application under Order I Rule 10 CPC.
Bhavya Cerations v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that writ petitions challenging show cause notices under Section 4 of the Public Premises Act are not maintainable and directed petitioners to file replies and exhaust statutory remedies before the Estate Officer.
OYO HOTELS AND HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED v. DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
The Delhi High Court held that withholding of tax refund under Section 241A requires detailed, written reasons and prior approval, and mere issuance of scrutiny notice does not justify withholding refund.
Lokesh Kumar Arya v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to consider and extend old pension scheme benefits to the petitioner if eligible, following binding precedents and applicable pension rules.
MODI-MUNDIPHARMA PVT. LTD. v. PREET INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD & ANR.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for trademark infringement and passing off, holding that the defendant's mark FEMICONTIN is not deceptively similar to the plaintiff's descriptive mark FECONTIN-F, and that the plaintiff failed to prove infringement or passing off.
Rajeev Kumar v. Prem Chand
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the appellate court’s dismissal of the appeal and upheld valid service of summons on the defendant’s brother, emphasizing limited supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 and distinct civil standards of proof.
Shri Deepak Gupta v. Regional Director CBSE
The Delhi High Court directed CBSE and the school to provide a scribe and extra time to a Class 12 student suffering from a psychosomatic neurological disorder for her board examinations.
Ramola Bhuyan v. Max Healthcare Institute Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed Defendant No. 1's application to be deleted from the suit in a medical negligence case, holding that the issue is triable and cannot be decided without recording evidence.
Shankar Shyamnaval Mishra v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court directed the Ministry of Civil Aviation to constitute the Appellate Committee within two weeks and allowed the petitioner to file an appeal against his designation as an unruly passenger, extending the limitation period accordingly.
Ajay Kumar Jindal v. Superintendent, Ward 71, Central Goods and Services Tax, Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that GST registration cannot be cancelled ab-initio where the business existed and directed reconsideration of refund of accumulated input tax credit, setting aside retrospective cancellation from registration date.
Maya Devi v. Manoj Kumar and Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court's decree for specific performance of a sale agreement where the plaintiffs proved the contract, part payment, and readiness to pay balance consideration, rejecting the defendant's loan claim and procedural objections.
Naveen Arora v. High Court of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a judicial officer for accepting sponsored hotel stays from a stranger, affirming limited judicial review in departmental inquiries and the applicability of strict conduct standards for judicial officers.
M/S Feedback Energy Distribution Company Limited v. RBL Bank Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed expeditious disposal of appeals against an ex-parte interim order that restrained the petitioner company's functioning and curtailed fundamental rights, emphasizing prompt adjudication to prevent prejudice.