Delhi High Court
94,906 judgments
Chandan Aggarwal v. Kundan Lal Gera & Anr
The Delhi High Court allowed limited recall and cross-examination of a witness based on newly surfaced documents not previously known to the party, emphasizing restriction to relevant issues and preventing trial delay.
The State Govt of NCT of Delhi v. Afaq Hussain Ansari & Ors.
The Delhi High Court set aside the trial court's discharge order, holding that at the charge framing stage, only prima facie case or grave suspicion is required without conducting a mini trial, and remanded the matter for fresh charge framing.
M/S METHODEX SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, holding that arbitration can be validly invoked if the Dispute Redressal Committee fails to decide within the contractual period.
M/S. Antriksh Developers & Promoters v. Shri Vipin Arora
The Delhi High Court held that a Commercial Court lacking jurisdiction under Section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 cannot decide applications under Order I Rule 10 CPC and must transfer the suit and related applications to the competent Civil Court.
Harpreet Singh and Others v. Union of India and Others
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking retrospective promotions and benefits under a discontinued sports incentive policy due to delay and absence of challenge to the subsequent policy.
Inder Singh Solanki v. Devender Sehrawat & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that demarcation directed during abeyance of a contempt order can be recorded and considered in related writ proceedings without taking coercive action against the appellant.
Anju v. Anil
The Delhi High Court set aside the dismissal of a maintenance petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. due to the petitioner's serious illness and counsel's negligence, restoring the petition for fresh hearing.
Mustafa v. State of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the appellant's conviction under Sections 393, 398, and 34 IPC but reduced the sentence to the period already served considering the long delay and appellant's circumstances.
Jai Prakash Dwivedi v. Hirise Facility Management Pvt Ltd & Anr
The Delhi High Court held that imposing costs as a penalty for filing a suit in a Court lacking territorial jurisdiction is unsustainable if the mistake was genuine, and quashed the cost imposed on the petitioner.
M/S. Antriksh Developers & Promoters Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Shri Vipin Arora & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a Commercial Court lacking jurisdiction over a suit cannot decide applications under Order I Rule 10 CPC arising from that suit and directed transfer to the competent Civil Court for fresh adjudication.
Dinesh Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi); Yogesh Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court upheld the appellants' conviction for assault but reduced their sentence to the period already served due to the prolonged pendency of the case and their good conduct.
Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sony Mobile Communications Ind Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court upheld that an income tax assessment order framed against a company dissolved by amalgamation is void and cannot be cured as a procedural defect under Section 292B.
Savita Devi v. Lalit Kumar
The Delhi High Court modified the interim maintenance amount payable by the husband to his wife and minor son, emphasizing proper income assessment beyond self-declared affidavits and balancing the parties' circumstances.
Saraswati Printers v. M/S Life Essentials Personal Care Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's discretion to dismiss a judgment on admission application under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC where the defendant raised triable issues and denied the alleged acknowledgment of liability.
M/S. Antriksh Developers & Promoters v. Anil Kumar Goel
A Commercial Court lacking jurisdiction under Section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act cannot decide applications under Order I Rule 10 CPC, and such matters must be transferred to a competent civil court for fresh adjudication.
Foot Locker Retail, Inc. v. Geeta Kewalani
The Delhi High Court granted interim injunction to Foot Locker Retail, Inc. restraining the defendant from using the deceptively similar "FOOT LOCKERS" mark, holding that prior registration and use by the plaintiff outweighed the defendant's later registration and claimed prior use.
Flowmore Limited v. M/S Skipper Limited
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging the arbitral award, holding that the award did not suffer from patent illegality or perversity and that the arbitrator's findings were supported by evidence and within jurisdiction.
Progressive Infotech Private Limited v. Ircon International Ltd.
The Delhi High Court allowed the petition to remove the arbitrator due to inordinate delay and ineligibility under the 2015 Arbitration Act amendments, appointing a substitute arbitrator to ensure impartial and expeditious arbitration.
Aayushi Dineshbhai Prajapati v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking an eligibility certificate for FMGE, holding that the petitioner did not fulfill the mandatory continuous two-year study of required subjects at 10+2 level as prescribed by statutory medical education regulations.
M Samundra Singh v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court directed CRPF authorities to decide the petitioner's promotion representation within four weeks, disposing of the writ petition without quashing the impugned orders.