Delhi High Court

29,474 judgments

Year:

Gurcharan Singh Anand and Ors. v. The Govt. of N.C.T. Delhi and Ors.

16 Jan 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:1042

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR and proceedings arising from a neighborly dispute after the parties amicably settled and the complainant withdrew the complaint.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR amicable settlement Section 482 CrPC criminal proceedings

Mansi Sharma & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

16 Jan 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:829

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 66(D) IT Act arising from matrimonial disputes following a voluntary amicable settlement between the parties.

criminal petition_allowed Significant amicable settlement matrimonial dispute quashing of FIR Section 66(D) IT Act

SH HARI GOPAL v. SH SUSHIL KUMAR & ANR.

16 Jan 2023 · Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2023:DHC:459
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the eviction of a tenant under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, holding that the landlord's bona fide need was established and the tenant failed to raise a triable issue to defend.

property appeal_dismissed Significant eviction Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Section 14(1)(e) bona fide need

Sh. Naresh @ Ranjan and Anr. v. The State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

16 Jan 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:625

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for electricity theft after the parties amicably settled the civil liability, holding that continuation of criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR Section 135 Electricity Act 2003 theft of electricity civil liability settlement

Dharampal Gupta v. Laxmi Devi

16 Jan 2023 · Jyoti Singh · 2023:DHC:607

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging possession suit decree, holding that an unregistered Agreement to Sell without enforceable rights under Section 53A cannot defeat co-owner's possession claim, and refused to reopen defence evidence closed voluntarily.

civil appeal_dismissed Agreement to Sell Doctrine of Part Performance Section 53A Transfer of Property Act possession suit

Dinesh Chahal & Ors. v. State by Dabri Police Station & Anr.

16 Jan 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:675

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on a voluntary and amicable settlement between estranged spouses in a matrimonial dispute.

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

MS Bridge Building Construction Co Pvt Ltd v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd

16 Jan 2023 · Prateek Jalan · 2023:DHC:404

The Delhi High Court set aside arbitral awards on the ground that the arbitrator was unilaterally appointed and failed to make mandatory disclosures, holding that such awards are without jurisdiction and cannot be validated by implied waiver.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 12(5) unilateral appointment arbitrator ineligibility

Kapil S/O Harprashad v. State (NCT of Delhi)

16 Jan 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:386

The Delhi High Court held that an accused granted bail cannot be kept in custody solely for inability to furnish sureties and directed release on personal bond without sureties, emphasizing the constitutional ethos against property-based denial of bail.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant bail personal bond surety poverty

Captain G. Raghavendra Reddy v. Air India Limited

16 Jan 2023 · Jyoti Singh · 2023:DHC:585

The Delhi High Court held that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 does not extend to Air India Limited post-disinvestment, dismissing the petition as not maintainable and granting liberty to approach appropriate forums.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant writ petition Article 226 disinvestment Air India Limited

Nirdosh Kumar v. Sonu & Ors

16 Jan 2023 · Rekha Palli · 2023:DHC:335

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation for a motor accident victim by recognizing higher functional disability, adjusting future prospects, increasing amounts for pain and suffering, and allowing for future artificial limb replacements.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 loss of future earning capacity functional disability pain and suffering

APAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. SH RUMMY CHHABRA

16 Jan 2023 · Manmohan; Saurabh Banerjee · 2023:DHC:344-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld an ex-parte interim injunction restraining the appellant from using the trademark "VELLO" based on binding undertakings to cease use, withdraw conflicting applications, and dispose of existing stock.

civil appeal_dismissed interim injunction trademark infringement Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 exclusive trademark rights

Dr. Jitendra Pal Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

16 Jan 2023 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Neena Bansal Krishna · 2023:DHC:359-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the BSF to constitute a Special Review Medical Board to assess the petitioner's suitability for promotion and decide on his case within a specified timeframe.

administrative other promotion Deputy Inspector General Medical Superintendent Review Board

M/S EUREKA FORBES LIMITED v. VAIBHAV AGRO INDUSTRIES

16 Jan 2023 · Sanjeev Narula · 2023:DHC:874

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction against defendant’s use of the deceptively similar "AquaSure" mark, recognizing plaintiff’s prior trademark rights and passing off claim, but dismissed copyright infringement and damages claims.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Passing off Trade Marks Act 1999 Copyright infringement

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sima Devi and Ors.

16 Jan 2023 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2023:DHC:643
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the territorial jurisdiction of the Employees’ Compensation Commissioner and the imposition of penalty on the insurer for delayed compensation payment under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 territorial jurisdiction penalty under Section 4-A(3) compensation claim

Novamax Industries LLP v. Prem Appliances & Anr.

16 Jan 2023 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:333

The Delhi High Court held that prior publication of a registered design, established by the plaintiff's own documents, is a valid defence under the Designs Act, leading to vacation of the interim injunction against alleged design infringement.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Designs Act prior publication design registration infringement

Mohit Kumar Bharti & Ors. v. State

16 Jan 2023 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2023:DHC:624

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following a genuine and voluntary settlement between estranged spouses and mutual consent divorce.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498A IPC Section 406 IPC

Sushil Pandey & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

16 Jan 2023 · Ajay S. Sogi; Avinrudh Bose

The High Court held that seniority lists for Uttar Pradesh Police promotions must strictly comply with statutory rules, excluding retired/deceased officers and properly integrating direct recruits and promotees, setting aside the flawed 2013 list.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant seniority list Uttar Pradesh Police Assistant Sub-Inspector promotion Uttar Pradesh Police Subordinate Services Rules 1979

Share Samadhan Limited v. Vinay Prakash Sadh

16 Jan 2023 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:4989

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 due to the respondent's failure to cooperate in arbitration proceedings as per the agreement.

arbitration appeal_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) appointment of arbitrator arbitration clause

The Indian Expressp Ltd v. The Indian Express Newspapers Workers Union Regd and Anr

15 Jan 2023 · Anish Dayal · 2024:DHC:348

The Delhi High Court upheld the Industrial Tribunal’s award increasing the retirement age of Indian Express workers from 58 to 60 years, affirming the Tribunal’s jurisdiction despite certified Standing Orders under the SO Act.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 retirement age superannuation

M/S Sudhakara Infratech Private Limited v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

13 Jan 2023 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Subramonium Prasad · 2023:DHC:259-DB

The Delhi High Court held that ambiguous tender clauses must be harmoniously construed to allow societies to participate, upholding the award to a Joint Venture including a society and dismissing the challenge to the tender outcome.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Tender eligibility Society participation Joint Venture Municipal Corporation of Delhi