Delhi High Court

95,726 judgments

Year:

PM Franchise Brands, LLC v. Registrar of Trade Marks

03 Nov 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:4670

The Delhi High Court allowed partial registration of a trademark by permitting the distinctive logo to be registered after deleting the descriptive word 'PRETZELMAKER' from the mark.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 9 Section 11 descriptive mark

Visage Beauty and Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. v. Registrar of Trademarks

03 Nov 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:4669

Delhi High Court allowed registration of the composite trademark 'GLOW-GETTER' for cosmetics, holding that descriptive components do not bar registration if the mark as a whole is distinctive, subject to disclaimers.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant trademark registration Section 9(1)(b) Trademarks Act descriptive mark composite mark

M/s Jindal Industries Private Limited v. The Registrar of Trade Mark

03 Nov 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022/DHC/004693

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal directing registration of the appellant's trademark featuring the outline of India, holding such use is not prohibited under the Emblems and Names Act and prior registrations and user claims must be considered.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Emblems and Name (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 outline of map of India trademark registration

Jindal Industries Private Limited v. The Registrar of Trade Mark

03 Nov 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:4694

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal directing registration of the 'Jindal' trademark with the map of India, holding that prior registrations and a no-objection certificate negate objections under the Trade Marks Act and Emblems and Names Act.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 9 Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 Trademark registration

Kuldeep Singh Sejwal v. Sunita Kohli

03 Nov 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:4686
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Commercial Court's refusal to grant summary judgment in a commercial eviction suit, emphasizing the limited scope of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 and the necessity of trial where factual disputes exist.

civil petition_dismissed Significant summary judgment Order XIII-A CPC Article 227 Constitution of India supervisory jurisdiction

Alka Jain v. ACIT Circle 51(1), Delhi

03 Nov 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:4676-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Revenue to grant the petitioner’s pending income tax refunds for AY 2009-10 and 2010-11 along with applicable interest, rejecting denial based on TDS credit shortfall.

tax petition_allowed Income Tax Act, 1961 refund interest under Section 244A appeal effect

Rajasthan Global Securities Pvt Ltd v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 19(1)

03 Nov 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:4675-DB

The Delhi High Court held that income tax notices issued in the name of a dissolved transferor company post-merger are invalid and directed reissuance to the correct transferee company with opportunity to respond.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 148A(b) Section 148A(d)

M/S IRB Goa Tollway Private Limited v. National Highway Authority of India

03 Nov 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Saurabh Banerjee

The Delhi High Court dismissed appeals challenging a partial modification of an arbitral award, affirming that Financial Close fixed the Appointed Date, denying damages for delay not attributable to the claimant, and upholding limited judicial interference under the Arbitration Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Financial Close Appointed Date Concession Agreement

Amarjeet Sharma v. Serious Fraud Investigation Office

03 Nov 2022 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
Cites 8 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that post filing of the complaint under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., accused are not entitled to default bail for alleged illegal remand beyond 15 days without a reasoned order, dismissing bail applications in a major SFIO fraud case.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 167 Cr.P.C. default bail judicial remand Companies Act, 2013

Delhi Transport Corporation v. Shyam Sunder

03 Nov 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:4662

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a departmental enquiry and termination of a workman despite non-examination of the passenger, emphasizing that the workman's admission on the passenger's statement suffices as proof of misconduct.

labor appeal_allowed Significant departmental enquiry industrial disputes act termination workman misconduct

Anit Kumar @ Anit Singh v. Pooja

03 Nov 2022 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:4695

The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction in child custody matters under the Guardian and Wards Act requires a preliminary enquiry and issue framing by the Family Court before a finding is returned.

family other Significant territorial jurisdiction Guardian and Wards Act custody preliminary issue

Karshanbhai ShamlaJi Mali v. Union of India & Ors.

03 Nov 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Saurabh Banerjee · 2022:DHC:4664-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking withdrawal of resignation filed after more than a year, holding that such withdrawal is impermissible beyond the 90-day period prescribed under CCS CCA Pension Rules.

administrative petition_dismissed withdrawal of resignation CCS CCA Pension Rules Office Memorandum 10.06.2019 public service resignation

Public Works Department v. Chander Kala

03 Nov 2022 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:4659

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to file a delayed appeal against the gratuity payment order, stayed recovery proceedings, and awarded litigation expenses to the respondent under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Controlling Authority Appellate Authority gratuity payment

Pramod Singla v. Union of India & Ors.

03 Nov 2022 · Siddharth Mridul; Amit Sharma · 2022:DHC:4609-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld a COFEPOSA detention order, ruling that delay by the Central Government in deciding a post-referral representation is not fatal when awaiting the Advisory Board's opinion.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant COFEPOSA detention order representation delay Article 22(5)

Vinod Kumar v. State

03 Nov 2022 · Mukta Gupta; Anish Dayal · 2022:DHC:4620-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the convictions and life sentences of three appellants for gang rape, emphasizing that appeals must be decided on merits and remission of sentence lies solely with the Government.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 374 CrPC appeal rape conviction prosecutrix testimony Section 432 CrPC remission

State (NCT of Delhi) v. Karan Singh

02 Nov 2022 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2022:DHC:4777
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a rash and negligent driving case due to failure of the prosecution to prove identity and guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Acquittal Rash and negligent driving Benefit of doubt Identification of accused

Navendu Agrawal v. State & Anr.

02 Nov 2022 · Talwant Singh · 2022:DHC:4987

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition challenging the refusal to order police investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., holding that the petitioner lacked locus standi and no cognizable offence was made out without formal complaints from authorities.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. locus standi in criminal law FIR registration non-cognizable offence

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -6 v. Moet Hennessy India Pvt. Ltd.

02 Nov 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:4967-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT’s deletion of transfer pricing adjustments on AMP expenditure, ruling that such expenditure does not constitute an international transaction absent concrete evidence, and rejected the Revenue’s reliance on the Bright Line Test.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Transfer Pricing Advertising Marketing and Promotion Expenditure International Transaction Bright Line Test

Nusrat Jahan v. Professor Nazim Hussain Jafri & Ors.

02 Nov 2022 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Subramonium Prasad · 2022:DHC:4941-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that a candidate who had not completed the qualifying degree before the application date was ineligible for Ph.D. admission and that admission to two regular courses concurrently is prohibited under university rules.

administrative appeal_dismissed Ph.D. admission eligibility criteria University Ordinance 5(V) concurrent admission

Rajesh Sharma v. Union of India

02 Nov 2022 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Subramonium Prasad · 2022:DHC:5358-DB

Employees under the ACP Scheme must pass the trade test in the first attempt after 09.08.1999 to claim benefits from the due date of service completion; otherwise, benefits accrue only from the date of passing the test.

administrative appeal_allowed (in part), appeal_dismissed (in part) Significant Assured Career Progression Scheme financial upgradation trade test promotion eligibility