Delhi High Court

71,673 judgments

Year:

Ramesh Chander v. Central Board of Direct Taxes

22 Apr 2022 · Najmi Waziri; Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2022:DHC:1996-DB

The Delhi High Court held that only the Finance Minister has authority to issue Charge Memos against Group A officers appointed by the President, setting aside an improperly sanctioned Charge Memo.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Charge Memo Finance Minister Group A officer Disciplinary proceedings

Springboard Solutions Pvt Ltd v. Finaxar Technology Solutions Private Limited

22 Apr 2022 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2022:DHC:1447

The Delhi High Court directed the disputes arising under the Coworking Letter to be referred to arbitration under the Delhi International Arbitration Centre in accordance with the arbitration clause and applicable law.

arbitration appeal_allowed arbitration clause reference to arbitration Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 section 12 disclosure

K.S. Textiles Pvt. Ltd. v. Sheen India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

22 Apr 2022 · Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2022:DHC:1464

The Delhi High Court upheld the Magistrate's order permitting pre-summoning evidence of the bank manager in Section 138 NI Act proceedings, dismissing the petition challenging procedural steps as causing delay.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 138 NI Act Section 482 Cr.P.C. pre-summoning trial summons

P D KANUNJNA v. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

22 Apr 2022 · Najmi Waziri; Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2022:DHC:1746-DB

The Delhi High Court held that disciplinary proceedings against a Group A officer appointed by the President require sanction from the Finance Minister, and quashed a Charge Memo issued without such sanction.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Charge Memo Disciplinary Proceedings Finance Minister Minister of State for Finance

Vistrat Real Estates Private Limited v. Asian Hotels North Ltd

22 Apr 2022 · Mukta Gupta · 2022:DHC:1435

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, holding that disputes involving third parties not signatories to the arbitration agreement are for the arbitrator to decide under the doctrine of competence-competence.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 12(2) Arbitration agreement

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

22 Apr 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:1619

Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the refusal of trademark registration for a mark containing the map of India, holding that such use is not prohibited under the Trade Marks Act or Emblems and Names Act when permission from Survey of India exists.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act 1999 Section 9(2)(d) Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act 1950 map of India

Sumandeep Vidyapeeth v. Union of India

22 Apr 2022 · Rekha Palli · 2022:DHC:1437

The Delhi High Court upheld MARBISM's denial of permission to start a new Ayurvedic Medical College due to non-compliance with minimum infrastructure and faculty standards, emphasizing the primacy of expert regulatory assessments.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Ayurvedic Medical College Letter of Permission No Objection Certificate Indian Medicine Central Council Regulations 2016

Trikutta Travel Planners v. Union of India

22 Apr 2022 · Yashwant Varma · 2022:DHC:1472

The Delhi High Court held that ground handling agents have no indefeasible right to continue operations once third-party agencies are duly identified and cleared under the 2018 Regulations, modifying interim orders to permit transition.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Ground Handling Services Airports Authority of India 2018 Regulations Regulation 7(4)

Praveen Garg v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

22 Apr 2022 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2022:DHC:1490

A writ petition challenging unauthorized construction is not maintainable under Article 226 unless the petitioner demonstrates infringement of a fundamental or legal right.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Article 226 illegal construction locus standi fundamental rights

Rajni Kukreja v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation

22 Apr 2022 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2022:DHC:1491

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner’s writ seeking removal of a municipal wall obstructing her shop’s entrance, holding that suppression of material facts and lawful municipal reconstruction disentitled her from relief.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Article 226 Constitution of India Right to property Article 19(1)(g) Suppression of material facts

DHL International GmbH v. DLH Express Services Private Ltd.

22 Apr 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:1592

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and declared 'DHL' a well-known trademark, restraining the Defendant from using the deceptively similar mark 'DLH' in courier services.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement well-known mark passing off dilution

Manish Gupta v. The State NCT of Delhi

22 Apr 2022 · Mukta Gupta · 2022:DHC:1436

The Delhi High Court held that a complaint filed by a single member Appropriate Authority appointed for part of the State under the PC&PNDT Act is valid, and cognizance taken thereon is lawful, dismissing the petitioners' challenge to the complaint and proceedings.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant PC&PNDT Act Appropriate Authority Section 17(3)(a) Section 17(3)(b)

Saga Lifesciences Limited v. Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.

22 Apr 2022 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2022:DHC:1525

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction protecting the plaintiff's prior user rights in the trademark "ULTRAMOL" against identical use by the defendant on pharmaceutical products, emphasizing the stricter standard for confusion in medicinal trademarks.

civil appeal_allowed Significant passing off prior user rights trademark infringement pharmaceutical trademarks

State v. Ganesh Chhetri

21 Apr 2022 · Siddharth Mridul; Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2022:DHC:1542-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld conviction under Section 324 IPC but dismissed the State's appeal to convict under Section 307 IPC due to lack of evidence of intention to kill.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 307 IPC Section 324 IPC intention to kill attempt to murder

MCCAIN FOODS INDIA PVT LTD v. BHARAT KUMAR THAKOR AND ANR.

21 Apr 2022 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2022:DHC:1449

The Delhi High Court allowed substitution of the sole arbitrator with a Gujarati-speaking arbitrator and permitted flexible venue arrangements to facilitate arbitration proceedings.

arbitration appeal_allowed Arbitration Sole Arbitrator Substitution of Arbitrator Section 12 Arbitration and Conciliation Act

HERO FINCORP LIMITED v. SAMTEL HAL DISPLAY SYSTEMS LIMITED & ORS.

21 Apr 2022 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2022:DHC:1450

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator pursuant to the arbitration clause in the parties' agreement, allowing the petition for reference of disputes to arbitration.

civil petition_allowed arbitration clause appointment of arbitrator Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 section 12 disclosure

KAMAL ENTERPRISE v. HERO MOTOCORP LTD.

21 Apr 2022 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2022:DHC:1448

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator by consent of parties under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, despite the agreement providing for a panel of three arbitrators.

arbitration petition_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 appointment of arbitrator sole arbitrator arbitral tribunal

M/S DRS LOGISTICS (P) LTD & ANR v. GOOGLE INDIA PVT LTD & ORS

21 Apr 2022 · Asha Menon · 2022:DHC:1415

Delhi High Court issued notice in contempt proceedings against Google entities for alleged violation of interim injunction restraining use of plaintiffs' trademarks as keywords in online ads, emphasizing need for investigation and removal of infringing ads upon complaint.

civil other Significant interim injunction trademark infringement keywords in online advertising contempt of court

Jindal Realty Limited v. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

21 Apr 2022 · Manmohan; Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2022:DHC:1440-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside a faceless income tax assessment order for failure to issue a mandatory draft assessment order and show cause notice, emphasizing compliance with natural justice and procedural requirements under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Faceless Assessment Scheme Section 144B Income Tax Act Natural Justice Show Cause Notice

Elcom Innovation Pvt. Ltd. v. Harish Sharma & Ors.

21 Apr 2022 · Amit Bansal, J. · 2022:DHC:1430

The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's applications for interim injunction against misuse of confidential information and for share transfer, holding that confidentiality obligations survive termination but injunctions require specific pleadings and share transfer must follow fair market valuation after plaintiff's default.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Share Purchase and Shareholders Agreement Confidential Information Interim Injunction Right of First Refusal