Delhi High Court

67,052 judgments

Year:

Girish Rehani v. Keltech Infrastructure Limited

02 Aug 2022 · Prateek Jalan · 2022:DHC:6027

The Delhi High Court appointed a common arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate disputes arising from three MoUs between the parties, directing arbitration under DIAC and continuing interim protection.

civil appeal_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 Section 9 Section 12

Rajesh Kumar Singh v. Union of India

02 Aug 2022 · Satish Chandra Sharma; Subramonium Prasad · 2022:DHC:2929-DB

The Delhi High Court held that drawing pay on Non-Functional Upgradation basis does not qualify a candidate to hold a post or equivalent post required for eligibility to the CMD position in TCIL.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Non-Functional Upgradation Additional Secretary Chairman & Managing Director Telecommunications Consultants India Limited

Mandrai Sarika Rajesh v. Central Reserve Police Force

02 Aug 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Saurabh Banerjee · 2022:DHC:2921-DB

The Delhi High Court directed a re-examination by a medical board including a dental specialist for a recruitment candidate declared medically unfit, holding the re-examination report final and binding.

administrative petition_allowed Significant medical examination recruitment CAPF uniform guidelines

Hemant Verma v. M/S Daina Techno Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

02 Aug 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:2926
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the Supreme Court's COVID-19 limitation extension orders enlarge the time for filing written statements beyond 120 days, allowing the petitioner’s delayed written statement to be taken on record.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VIII Rule 1 CPC Written statement Extension of limitation COVID-19 pandemic

Shakarpur Slum Union v. DDA

02 Aug 2022 · Subramonium Prasad · 2022:DHC:2917

Delhi High Court upheld demolition of unauthorized jhuggis outside notified slum clusters on Yamuna floodplains, emphasizing adherence to DUSIB Policy and procedural safeguards for eviction and rehabilitation.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant DUSIB Policy 2015 Jhuggi Jhopri Bastis Slum rehabilitation Demolition

Raj Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

02 Aug 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Saurabh Banerjee · 2022:DHC:2922-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to join the transferee post based on an earlier medical fitness certificate, directing that a fresh medical examination is not mandatory before joining.

administrative petition_allowed medical fitness certificate promotion transfer fresh medical examination

C P Trivedi v. Union of India

02 Aug 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Saurabh Banerjee · 2022:DHC:2919-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of an interim application concerning recategorisation by a medical board and directed that the petitioner's fresh writ petition challenging the same be adjudicated without prejudice to parties' rights.

administrative other writ petition disability pension medical board recategorisation

Ravi Kant Sinha v. Jawaharlal Nehru University

02 Aug 2022 · Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J.; The Chief Justice; Mr. Justice... · 2022:DHC:2899-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal seeking retrospective ad-hoc promotion to Deputy Registrar, holding the appellant ineligible before fulfilling prescribed service criteria and barred by prior litigation.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant ad-hoc promotion Deputy Registrar deputation eligibility criteria

South Asian Stocks Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle22(2) Delhi & Anr.

02 Aug 2022 · Manmohan; Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora · 2022:DHC:2923-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the reopening notice issued to a broker under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, directing reassessment after considering the completed assessment of a related party and the broker's submissions.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 148A Assessment reopening

N.D. Tyagi v. Power Finance Corporation Ltd. & Ors.

02 Aug 2022 · Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J.; Subramonium Prasad, J. · 2022:DHC:2900-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a parent company retains jurisdiction to initiate disciplinary proceedings against an employee for misconduct committed during deputation to its subsidiary after repatriation, dismissing the appeal challenging such proceedings.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant deputation disciplinary proceedings parent company subsidiary company

Rahul Sodi v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

02 Aug 2022 · Siddharth Mridul; Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2022:DHC:3131-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed a habeas corpus petition directing the production of a legally-wedded wife and affirmed the right of consenting adults to live together despite parental opposition based on inter-caste marriage.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant habeas corpus inter-caste marriage right to marry Article 226

Sona BLW Precision Forgings Ltd v. Sonae EV Private Limited

02 Aug 2022 · Navin Chawla · 2022:DHC:2927

The Delhi High Court upheld an injunction restraining the defendant from using the deceptively similar mark 'SONAE' in the EV sector, affirming the plaintiff's trademark rights and likelihood of confusion.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant trade mark infringement passing off deceptively similar marks Order XXXIX CPC

Neelam Chauhan v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

02 Aug 2022 · Anu Malhotra · 2022:DHC:2913

The Delhi High Court declined anticipatory bail to accused in a cheating and criminal conspiracy case involving Rs.1.10 crore, emphasizing the necessity of custodial interrogation and strict compliance with arrest procedures under Sections 41 and 41A CrPC.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant anticipatory bail Section 420 IPC Section 406 IPC Section 120B IPC

KEI Industries Limited v. The Registrar of Trade Marks

02 Aug 2022 · Jyoti Singh · 2022:DHC:3268

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and remanded the trademark registration application for reconsideration under Section 12 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, permitting the appellant to file evidence of prior use.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act 1999 Section 11(1) Section 12 prior use

Sh Shivraj Yadav & Ors. v. Dr Arun Nirula

02 Aug 2022 · Rekha Palli · 2022:DHC:2938
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld a decree for possession passed on clear admissions by the defendant under Order XII Rule 6 CPC, rejecting challenges based on unregistered and unstamped documents and prematurity of the suit.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC judgment on admissions licensee and licensor possession suit

Diageo Brands B.V. & Anr. v. Great Galleon Ventures Limited

02 Aug 2022 · Sanjeev Narula · 2022:DHC:2937

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of the plaintiffs’ registered design for the Hipster bottle and maintained the injunction against the defendant for infringing the design and trade dress, rejecting the defendant’s challenge under Section 19 of the Designs Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Registered Design Designs Act, 2000 Injunction Design Infringement

Lal Chand v. State (NCT of Delhi)

02 Aug 2022 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2022:DHC:2980

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction for rash and negligent driving causing death but reduced the sentence to the period already served by the petitioner.

criminal appeal_dismissed rash driving negligent driving Section 279 IPC Section 304A IPC

Aditya Narayan Ojha v. Principal Commissioner, CGST, Delhi North & Anr.

02 Aug 2022 · Rajiv Shakdher; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2022:DHC:3053-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the revenue to comply with the appellate order revoking GST registration cancellation, holding that cancellation without proper notice and reasons is unsustainable.

administrative petition_allowed Significant GST registration cancellation show-cause notice physical inspection notice Rule 25 CGST Rules 2017

KEI Industries Limited v. The Registrar of Trade Marks

02 Aug 2022 · Jyoti Singh · 2022:DHC:3269

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and remanded the trademark registration refusal to the Registrar for reconsideration under Section 12 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, permitting registration under special circumstances such as honest concurrent use.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act 1999 Section 11(1) Section 12 honest concurrent use

Victoria Foods Private Limited v. Rajdhani Masala Co. & Anr.

02 Aug 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:2949

Delhi High Court imposed heavy penalties and directed brand change on defendants for contempt and trademark infringement by manufacturing and selling 'RAJDHANI' branded products post injunction, while addressing food safety violations.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Trademark infringement Interim injunction Contempt of court Food Safety and Standards Act