Delhi High Court

33,049 judgments

Year:

Shri Hari Shamsher Kaushik v. Shri Jasbir Singh

09 May 2022 · Asha Menon · 2022:DHC:1775

The Delhi High Court upheld dismissal of a complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act for non-impleadment of the company, affirming that vicarious liability under Section 141 arises only if the company is prosecuted as the principal accused.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 Section 141 vicarious liability

Jai Kishan Datwani v. State, Govt. of NCT Delhi

09 May 2022 · Asha Menon · 2022:DHC:1774
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Sessions Court's order setting aside the discharge of the accused under Sections 498A and 304B IPC, directing committal for trial based on prima facie evidence of cruelty and antemortem injuries.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 498A IPC Section 304B IPC charge framing discharge order

Lumax Industries Limited & Ors. v. Hindustan Auto Industries

09 May 2022 · Jyoti Singh · 2022:DHC:1782

The Delhi High Court directed the Trial Court to hear the petitioners' interlocutory applications for ex parte injunction and appointment of Local Commissioner before service of summons on the respondent, allowing the petition for appropriate directions.

civil petition_allowed ex parte injunction Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC appointment of Local Commissioner Section 151 CPC

Surinder Pal Vij v. Gurmeet Singh Baweja & Ors.

09 May 2022 · Rekha Palli · 2022:DHC:1822

The Delhi High Court held that a writ petition under Article 226 is not maintainable against a private company not discharging public functions, dismissing the challenge to election notices of the All India Motor Transport Congress.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant writ jurisdiction Article 226 private company public function

Sholay Media Entertainment and Anr. v. Yogesh Patel and Ors.

09 May 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:1994
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the plaintiffs' exclusive rights in the mark 'SHOLAY', granted permanent injunctions against the defendants' unauthorized use of the mark and domain names, and awarded damages and costs for trademark infringement and passing off.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant SHOLAY trademark infringement passing off film title protection

National Highway Authority of India v. MEP Chennai Bypass Toll Road Pvt. Ltd.

09 May 2022 · Sanjeev Narula · 2022:DHC:1865
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that an ad hoc Arbitral Tribunal not bound by institutional rules may fix its own fees, and a party's acquiescence bars later challenge to the Tribunal's mandate on fee grounds.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitral Tribunal Arbitral fees Section 14 Arbitration and Conciliation Act Ad hoc arbitration

Pritam Singh v. Ashok Kumar Makkar

09 May 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:1778

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to summon two additional defence witnesses and directed strict adherence to trial dates without adjournments to ensure expeditious disposal.

criminal petition_allowed additional defence witnesses summoning witnesses adjournment refusal expeditious trial

Tanya Sharma v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board & Ors.

09 May 2022 · Najmi Waziri; Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2022:DHC:2067-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition directing DSSSB to appoint the petitioner with seniority as per merit and imposed costs for administrative delay in processing her candidature.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant recruitment DSSSB uploading documents cut-off date

Sanjana Rai alias Ankita Rai v. State and Anr.

09 May 2022 · Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2022:DHC:2052

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Sanjana Rai for trafficking and sexually exploiting a minor, affirming that minor inconsistencies in a child victim's testimony do not undermine the prosecution's case.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant human trafficking sexual exploitation minor victim child witness testimony

Union of India v. Delhi State Consumer Co Operative Federation Ltd.

09 May 2022 · Prateek Jalan · 2022:DHC:1783

The Delhi High Court held that an arbitral tribunal can recall its termination order under Section 25(a) of the Arbitration Act on sufficient cause, and the High Court can supervise such jurisdictional failures under Article 227.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 25(a) Termination of arbitration proceedings Recall of termination order

State NCT of Delhi v. Akash @ Gunni

09 May 2022 · Siddharth Mridul; Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2022:DHC:1856-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a sexual offence case against a minor victim due to unreliable testimony and lack of corroborative evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant minor victim sexual offence POCSO Act consent immaterial

Emandi A R Ajay Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

09 May 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2022:DHC:1821-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to consider and grant pro-rata pension to an ex-IAF personnel with over 10 years of service, in line with government notifications and prior judgments.

administrative petition_allowed Significant pro-rata pension Indian Air Force qualifying service Government of India notifications

Saloni Bansal and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

09 May 2022 · Najmi Waziri; Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2022:DHC:1899-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the Central Administrative Tribunal to expeditiously dispose of the petitioners' recruitment-related dispute to prevent prejudice caused by undue delay.

administrative other Significant Combined Graduate Level Examination Staff Selection Commission Central Administrative Tribunal timely justice

Flyover Distillers and Bottlers Private Limited v. OM Sons Marketing Private Limited

09 May 2022 · Najmi Waziri; Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2022:DHC:1777-DB

The Delhi High Court directed expeditious hearing of the appellant's application under Section 39(4) CPC to vacate an ex parte injunction, emphasizing timely disposal and limited arguments.

civil appeal_dismissed Section 39(4) CPC ex parte injunction vacation of injunction interlocutory application

Ram Kumar v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

09 May 2022 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2022:DHC:1863

The Delhi High Court dismissed a decade-delayed appeal against a motor accident claim award, holding that the appellant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for condonation of delay or justify setting aside the ex-parte award.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay sufficient cause ex-parte decree Order 9 Rule 13 CPC

Din Dayal v. Director General Central Industrial Security Force & Ors.

09 May 2022 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2022:DHC:1819-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the CISF to consider the petitioner’s request for posting in his home sector as per service policy and stayed the transfer orders pending such consideration.

administrative other writ petition service policy posting in home sector transfer orders

Jagjeet Singh v. Union of India

09 May 2022 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2022:DHC:1789

The Delhi High Court referred contract payment disputes involving common questions to a sole arbitrator for adjudication under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil petition_allowed arbitration arbitral tribunal contract disputes payment claims

Jagjeet Singh v. Union of India

09 May 2022 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2022:DHC:1788

The Delhi High Court directed reference of payment-related contractual disputes involving common issues to a sole arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

arbitration petition_allowed arbitration arbitral tribunal Clause 25 General Conditions of Contract payment disputes

Raj Kumari Taneja v. Rajinder Kumar & Ors.

09 May 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:6366

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration Act to resolve partnership disputes, holding that questions of settlement are for the arbitrator to decide.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(5) Section 11(6) Partnership Deed

Raj Kumari Taneja v. Rajinder Kumar & Anr.

09 May 2022 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:6365

The Delhi High Court held that under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration Act, the Court must appoint an arbitrator if an arbitration agreement exists and the petition is timely, leaving factual disputes such as settlement to the arbitrator.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 11(5) Arbitration and Conciliation Act arbitration agreement appointment of arbitrator disputed question of fact