Delhi High Court
67,052 judgments
Sunil Kumar alias Titu v. State of UT of Chandigarh
The Delhi High Court upheld orders directing an accused to give voice samples, ruling that such directions do not violate Article 20(3) rights and remain valid even after charge framing.
Phool Kumar Mehra v. State of Delhi; Irfan Khan v. State
The Delhi High Court acquitted appellants of criminal conspiracy and cheating charges in a government tender case, holding that prosecution failed to prove dishonest intention and conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt.
Mohd Sidik v. Vineeta Gupta & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's application seeking stay of execution of a motor accident claim award, emphasizing that withdrawal of an earlier appeal and failure to show sufficient grounds preclude stay of execution.
Epicuria Galley Private Limited v. Aspen Buildtech Limited
The Delhi High Court allowed the transfer petition under Section 24 CPC to transfer a civil suit to itself due to the suit's valuation exceeding the trial court's pecuniary jurisdiction after amendment.
Amit Anand v. State (N.C.T of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant in a murder case due to failure of prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt on circumstantial evidence.
Public Works Department v. Mangat Ram
The Delhi High Court remanded the dispute over jurisdiction under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 to the Appellate Authority, condoned delay in filing appeal, stayed recovery proceedings, and awarded litigation expenses to the respondent.
RAMAA ADVISORS PVT. LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
The Delhi High Court held that an Adjudicating Authority who ceases to hold office cannot be compelled to pronounce reserved judgments and dismissed appeals challenging the appointment of a new authority terminating the additional charge.
M/S Visual Technologies India Pvt Ltd v. Executive Engineer (E) PLEWD, CPWD and Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the disqualification of a bidder for failing to meet eligibility criteria by excluding warranty periods from contract completion, emphasizing limited judicial review in tender matters absent arbitrariness or mala fide.
RAMAA ADVISORS PVT. LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
The Delhi High Court held that an Adjudicating Authority who ceases to hold office cannot pronounce reserved judgments thereafter, and time extension notifications apply only to continuing officers, dismissing the appellants' challenge to the Ministry of Finance's notification appointing a new authority.
Jaspriya Bhasin v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors
The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR and proceedings against the petitioner for rash and negligent driving causing death, holding that the prosecution failed to establish gross negligence and the evidence was unreliable.
Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner's application to rectify clerical errors in the order dated 21.07.2022 by correcting the names of advocates appearing in the case.
Chem Academy Pvt. Ltd. v. Praveen Malik
The Delhi High Court held that disputes arising from breach of contract including non-compete clauses are arbitrable and appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, rejecting the respondent's non-arbitrability objections.
MR LV DEGAO & ORS. v. HTC CORPORATION & ORS.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellants' appeal against an interim injunction restraining them from using the 'HTC' trademark, holding that the respondent's well-known mark was infringed by the appellants' dishonest use causing likelihood of confusion.
Decathlon Sports India Pvt. Ltd. v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that an FIR under Section 188 IPC can be registered without a written complaint from the competent public servant, but courts cannot take cognizance without such complaint, and directed expeditious disposal of Covid-19 related petty offence cases.
Urmila & Ors. v. Delhi Development Authority & Ors.
Delhi High Court held that unnotified jhuggi clusters not existing before 2006 are not entitled to protection under the 2015 Policy and allowed demolition while directing rehabilitation assistance.
Vatech Global Co Ltd v. Unicorn Denmart Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that Vatech was entitled to recover outstanding invoice payments from Unicorn as the Distributor Agreement was not operative at dispute time, and procedural defects in plaint were curable.
MS AMBIENCE PVT. LTD AND ORS v. M/S PLANET ADVERTISING PVT. LTD
The Delhi High Court held that a suit originally filed as an ordinary suit cannot be mid-way treated as a commercial suit to apply the 120-day limitation for filing written statements under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and allowed the appellants to file their written statement with directions to complete trial within a fixed timeline.
M/S Scholastic India Pvt. Ltd. v. Smt. Kanta Batra
The Delhi High Court restored an arbitral award awarding damages for leasehold property repairs, holding that courts cannot reappreciate evidence under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and that bank statements and income tax returns are relevant evidence in arbitration.
Urmila & Ors. v. Delhi Development Authority & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that unnotified jhuggi clusters not existing before 2006 are not entitled to protection under the 2015 Policy, allowing demolition for environmental restoration while directing rehabilitation assistance.
Vatech Global Co Ltd v. Unicorn Denmart Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that invoices with agreed payment terms are binding contracts enforceable under Order XXXVII CPC, the distributor agreement was not extended beyond two years, Vatech did not breach exclusivity, and Unicorn's damages claim failed, allowing Vatech's suit for recovery of unpaid invoices.