Delhi High Court
76,921 judgments
Sh. Rohit Virmani v. Brig. (Retd.) Brijesh Virmani & Ors.
The Delhi High Court decreed a partition suit in terms of a valid and lawful family settlement recorded between the parties under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC.
Astrazeneca AB & Anr. v. Ajanta Pharma Limited
Judgment text unavailable; no substantive content provided for analysis.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-3 v. M/S Jaypee Financial Services Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal holding that additions to income not based on incriminating material found during search and with no pending assessment on search date cannot be sustained.
Astrazeneca AB & Anr. v. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Limited
Judgment text unavailable or insufficient for detailed analysis.
Sevenseas Global Express Logistics Pvt Ltd v. M/S Delta Comnet Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Official Liquidator's application to hand over possession of property to M/s Golf Technologies Pvt. Ltd. due to lack of documentary proof of title.
Adnan Amir v. Office of the Director of Local Bodies
The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to make a fresh representation for pay fixation and pay protection claims linked to past service, directing the SDMC to decide it by a speaking order after a personal hearing.
Astrazeneca AB & Anr. v. Micro Labs Limited
The Delhi High Court heard a commercial appeal filed by AstraZeneca against Micro Labs Limited, with the judgment referencing a related case and involving procedural applications.
Angel Gupta v. State NCT of Delhi
Delhi High Court upheld framing of charges against petitioner for conspiracy to murder, holding that circumstantial evidence and agreement suffice without overt act by every conspirator.
Sandeep Aggarwal v. Priyanka Agarwal
The Delhi High Court held that the 90-day limitation period under Section 28(4) of the Hindu Marriage Act applies to appeals under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act and allowed condonation of delay caused by COVID-19 lockdown.
AstraZeneca AB & Anr. v. Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld denial of interim injunctions in patent infringement suits, holding that credible challenges to patent validity and contradictory claims disentitled the patentee from interim relief.
ASTRAZENECA AB & ANR. v. MSN LABORATORIES PRIVATE LIMITED
Judgment in a commercial appeal between AstraZeneca AB and MSN Laboratories Private Limited delivered by the Delhi High Court on 20 July 2021.
Suraj Bhan Chauhan v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation
The Delhi High Court set aside the revocation of a building plan for failure to provide the petitioner a hearing as mandated under Section 338 of the DMC Act, remitting the matter for a fresh order after due opportunity.
Astrazeneca AB & Anr. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd.
Judgment entry for FAO(OS)(COMM) 140/2020 between AstraZeneca AB and Alkem Laboratories Ltd. dated July 20, 2021, with no substantive details provided.
Sarabjeet Singh v. Panchganga Schools Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court approved the appointment of two arbitrators by the parties and directed them to jointly appoint a presiding arbitrator, reserving court intervention if they fail to agree.
Astrazeneca AB & Anr. v. Zydus Healthcare Limited & Anr.
Judgment text not provided beyond case metadata; substantive content unavailable for analysis.
Bhavik S. Popat v. Bright Sales Corporation & Ors.
The Delhi High Court partly decreed a trademark infringement suit based on a valid settlement agreement with some defendants and allowed ex parte proceedings against others.
M/S. R.J. TRADING CO. v. COMMISSIONER OF CGST, DELHI NORTH
The Delhi High Court quashed unlawful search, seizure, and detention of goods at RJT's premises under Section 67(2) CGST Act for lack of valid authorization and jurisdictional basis.
Core Diagnostics Private Limited v. National E Assessment Centre New Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging a Draft Assessment Order, holding that such challenges must be raised in appeal and not in writ jurisdiction when an alternative remedy exists.
Om Prakash Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that CRPF personnel superannuated at 57 years are not entitled to pay for the intervening period before re-joining at 60 years, applying the 'no work, no pay' principle and emphasizing the need to challenge retirement timely.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-3 v. M/S Jaypee Financial Services Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, holding that additions to income post-search under Section 132 are unsustainable without incriminating material found during the search and no assessment was pending on the search date.