Delhi High Court

48,761 judgments

Year:

Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Exoncorp Private Limited

16 Jul 2019 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2019:DHC:3380

Delhi High Court held that the well-known trademark 'EXXON' is infringed by Defendant's use of 'EXONCORP' and that the Court has territorial jurisdiction over the suit due to Defendant's interactive website targeting customers in Delhi.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement well-known trademark territorial jurisdiction interactive website

Vinod alias Ganja & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi

16 Jul 2019 · A. K. Chawla · 2019:DHC:3378

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions under Section 308/34 IPC but modified the sentence by granting probation of good conduct to appellants involved in a sudden fight without premeditation.

criminal sentence_modified Significant Section 308 IPC Section 34 IPC Section 360 CrPC probation of good conduct

State (GNCT of Delhi) v. Hargovind

16 Jul 2019 · Manmohan; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2019:DHC:3375-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's appeal upholding the acquittal of the accused due to failure to conclusively prove the victim's minority and the offences under IPC and POCSO Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant benefit of doubt victim's age POCSO Act abduction

Ambuj A Kasliwal & Anr. v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Pvt Ltd & Ors.

16 Jul 2019 · Vipin Sanghi; Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2019:DHC:3377-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside DRAT orders requiring pre-deposit of adjusted balance amount, holding that pre-deposit must be based on the recovery certificate amount inclusive of compensation received during pendency.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 Section 21 pre-deposit Debt Recovery Tribunal Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal

Vikram Bakshi & Ors. v. State & Ors.

16 Jul 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:3376

The High Court set aside the Trial Court's non-speaking order taking cognizance without a written complaint under Section 195 Cr.P.C. and remitted the matter for a fresh reasoned order on summoning the accused under relevant provisions of the Companies Act and IPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 195 Cr.P.C. Cognizance Forgery Companies Act, 1956

The State, Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Tufail

16 Jul 2019 · Manmohan; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2019:DHC:3374-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's acquittal under the POCSO Act, emphasizing that appellate interference in acquittals requires very substantial and compelling reasons, especially when minor contradictions and lack of medical evidence exist.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant appeal against acquittal presumption of innocence POCSO Act sexual assault

Meenakshi v. State & Anr

16 Jul 2019 · Manmohan; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2019:DHC:3379-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of a habeas corpus petition regarding custody of a minor child by recording the mutual consent of the parents on residence and visitation arrangements in the child's best interest.

family other habeas corpus child custody minor child welfare of the child

Farhan Shaikh v. State (National Investigation Agency)

16 Jul 2019 · Vipin Sanghi; I.S. Mehta · 2019:DHC:3373-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the limitation period under Section 21(5) of the NIA Act is not absolute and delay beyond 60 days can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to protect the accused's fundamental right to appeal under Article 21.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 Section 21(5) NIA Act condonation of delay Section 5 Limitation Act

Shobha Aggarwal & Ors. v. Krishan Kumar & Anr.

16 Jul 2019 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2019:DHC:3390

The Delhi High Court held that daughters' registered relinquishment of their father's estate bars partition claims therein but does not affect their inheritance rights in their intestate mother's estate, allowing suit amendment and modifying interim relief accordingly.

civil other Significant relinquishment deed partition suit intestate succession interim injunction

Asha Chawla v. M/S Amrapali Aadya Trading & Investment Pvt. Ltd. and Anr

16 Jul 2019 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2019:DHC:3393

The Delhi High Court decreed a recovery suit for Rs. 3.95 crores against stock brokers due to absence of any triable defence by the defendants.

civil appeal_allowed Significant recovery suit stock broking services leave to defend triable defence

Balkrishan Malhotra v. Department of Post & Ors.

16 Jul 2019 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2019:DHC:3394

The Delhi High Court held that a petitioner is entitled to interest on deposits made and credited post-maturity in a PPF (HUF) account due to respondents’ acceptance and utilization of funds despite policy discontinuation.

civil petition_allowed Significant Public Provident Fund Hindu Undivided Family PPF maturity interest on deposits

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR v. V D PUSHKARNA

16 Jul 2019 · VIPIN SANGHI; RAJNISH BHATNAGAR · 2019:DHC:3389-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of departmental proceedings against a jail officer due to an unexplained eight-year delay in initiation and absence of direct negligence.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant departmental proceedings inordinate delay competency Punjab Prison Rules

Vinod Rana v. State

16 Jul 2019 · Manmohan; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2019:DHC:3382-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence of Vinod Rana for the murder of his live-in partner, emphasizing the accused's failure to explain incriminating evidence under Section 106 of the Evidence Act despite minor contradictions in prosecution witnesses.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant murder Section 302 IPC Section 106 Evidence Act blood-stained clothes

Deepak Bajaj & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

16 Jul 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3383

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 420, 406, and 34 IPC arising from a civil dispute following a mediated settlement, exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC civil dispute settlement

SHIRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD. v. JYOTI

16 Jul 2019 · Najmi Waziri · 2019:DHC:3398

The Delhi High Court set aside unsubstantiated loss of income compensation in a motor accident claim but enhanced damages for pain and suffering, emphasizing the need for concrete proof of earnings and appropriate assessment of injury impact.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident compensation loss of income minimum wages pain and suffering

Bhawan Khandelwal & Ors. v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

16 Jul 2019 · R.K. Gauba · 2019:DHC:3397

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute based on a bona fide settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with caution.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute

M/S GAIL (India) Ltd v. M/S Reliance Industries Ltd

16 Jul 2019 · Navin Chawla · 2019:DHC:3392

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award interpreting the Gas Supply Agreement's invoicing clause to allow additional claims on a 'whichever is higher' basis, dismissing challenges on limitation, waiver, and interest.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Gas Supply Agreement Article 11.02 Arbitral Award Whichever is higher principle

Reliance Industries Limited v. GAIL (India) Limited

16 Jul 2019 · Navin Chawla · 2019:DHC:3391

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitrator's award allowing GAIL to raise additional Debit Notes based on the 'whichever is higher' billing methodology under the Gas Supply Agreement, dismissing Reliance's challenge on limitation, waiver, and contract interpretation grounds.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Gas Supply Agreement Article 11.02 whichever is higher principle

Central Warehousing Corporation v. Innovative B2B Logistics Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

16 Jul 2019 · Navin Chawla · 2019:DHC:3396

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award interpreting the contract to limit the petitioner’s entitlement to specified warehousing area, rejected claims of illegality under Customs Regulations, and granted partial relief for operational disruptions, partly allowing the petitions.

civil appeal_partly_allowed Significant Arbitral Award Contract Interpretation Strategic Alliance Agreement Customs Bonded Area

Innovative B2B Logistics Solution Private Limited v. Central Warehousing Corporation

16 Jul 2019 · Navin Chawla · 2019:DHC:3395

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award interpreting the Strategic Alliance Agreement reasonably, rejecting the petitioner’s claims except for a limited issue on vague amendment directions.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award Contract Interpretation Strategic Alliance Agreement Request for Proposal