Delhi High Court

48,936 judgments

Year:

State GNCT of Delhi v. Baljeet Singh @ Shankey

11 Jul 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:3302

The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court's discharge of the accused from Section 12 POCSO offence due to absence of sexual intent in the alleged acts.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 12 POCSO sexual intent discharge order Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act

Baljeet Singh @ Shanky v. State & Anr.

11 Jul 2019 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2019:DHC:3301

The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR and criminal proceedings under various IPC sections and POCSO Act after the parties, who are first cousins, amicably settled their dispute to restore family peace.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR settlement between parties family dispute Section 482 CrPC

Natco Pharma Limited v. Bayer Healthcare LLC

11 Jul 2019 · S. Muralidhar; Talwant Singh · 2019:DHC:3305-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside an interim injunction restraining patent infringement due to lack of satisfaction of legal requirements and remanded the matter for fresh hearing.

civil appeal_allowed Significant interim injunction patent infringement pharmaceutical patent prima facie case

Vishal v. State & Anr.

11 Jul 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3314

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, 34 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act on the ground of amicable settlement between parties, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

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

Ved Prakash Mishra v. State

11 Jul 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3313

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under the Arms Act against a petitioner who unknowingly carried live cartridges, holding that absence of conscious possession and mens rea justified quashing under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR Arms Act 1959 conscious possession

Kunal Berani & Ors. v. The State & Anr.

11 Jul 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3315

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute upon amicable settlement and subject to compensation for the complainant's loss.

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

Chander Shekhar & Ors. v. The State (GNCT of Delhi) & Anr.

11 Jul 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3316

The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC based on a mediated settlement, applying inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498A IPC

Shyam Kapoor and Ors. v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

11 Jul 2019 · Hima Kohli; Asha Menon · 2019:DHC:3317

The Delhi High Court upheld the municipal authority's Circular directing relocation of unauthorized squatters from Ajmal Khan Road, emphasizing verification of lawful claims by the Town Vending Committee and permitting interim enforcement for pedestrianisation.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant tehbazaari rights non-squatting zone no-vending zone Street Vendors Act 2014

Nirmal Singh v. Horizon Crest India Real Estate and Ors.

11 Jul 2019 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2020:DHC:2356
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 starts from receipt of the award, rejected the petitioner's attempt to extend limitation via a misconceived Section 33(1) application, and dismissed the petition as barred by limitation.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 33(1) Section 34(3) Limitation

M/S SNG DEVELOPERSPVT.LTD. v. M/S ASIAPRAGATICAPFINPVT.LTD.

10 Jul 2019 · S. Muralidhar; Talwant Singh · 2019:DHC:8000-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the appellants to withdraw their appeals against the NCLT order with liberty to approach the court again if needed, dismissing the appeals as withdrawn.

civil appeal_dismissed appeal withdrawal National Company Law Tribunal liberty to approach court dismissal as withdrawn

Shristi Communication Network v. Technobile Systems Pvt Ltd & Anr

10 Jul 2019 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2019:DHC:3296

The Delhi High Court upheld TDSAT's procedure of deciding claims on affidavit evidence without oral evidence and held that the order directing return of Set Top Boxes was a final, appealable order, dismissing the petition challenging these orders.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal TRAI Act Section 16 TRAI Act oral evidence

M/S. EPCOS ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS S.A v. Union of India & Ors.

10 Jul 2019 · S. Muralidhar; Talwant Singh · 2019:DHC:3295-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a revision petition under Section 264 is maintainable against an intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act and allowed the petitioner to revise its return to pay tax at 10% under the DTAA Protocol, directing refund of excess tax paid.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 264 Income Tax Act Section 143(1) intimation Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement Protocol to DTAA

SOCIÉTÉ DES PRODUITS NESTLÉ, S A v. KAIRA DISTRICT COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD

10 Jul 2019 · G. S. Sistani; Jyoti Singh · 2019:DHC:3293-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a plaintiff registered proprietor cannot be restrained by interim order from using its trademark on goods beyond those manufactured at the interim order date without a defendant's counterclaim or independent suit asserting prior user rights.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Interim injunction Status quo Prior user rights

Chanda Tiwari v. Directorate of Social Welfare and Anr

10 Jul 2019 · J.R. Midha · 2019:DHC:3294

The Delhi High Court upheld termination based on bona fide loss of confidence despite delay in raising dispute, holding reinstatement not mandatory and claim barred as stale.

labor petition_dismissed Significant loss of confidence termination stale claim industrial dispute

Naresh Kumar Sodhi v. State & Anr.

10 Jul 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3297

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 323, 354, and 506 IPC on the ground of amicable settlement and resolved misunderstanding between the parties, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC amicable settlement inherent jurisdiction

Shri Raj Kumar Batra v. State & Anr

10 Jul 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3299

The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of an FIR under Sections 498-A/34 IPC in a matrimonial dispute on the ground of amicable settlement, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498-A IPC

Sanjay Kumar & Anr v. State of NCT Delhi & Anr

10 Jul 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3300

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC matrimonial dispute Section 498-A IPC

Chand Mohammad v. State

10 Jul 2019 · Sunil Gaur · 2019:DHC:3298

The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC based on a mediated settlement, applying the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to prevent oppression and futile proceedings.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 482 CrPC matrimonial dispute Section 498A IPC

Priyanka Shukla v. Union of India and Ors.

10 Jul 2019 · CHIEF JUSTICE; C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:3292-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed termination of pregnancy beyond the statutory 20-week limit in a case of severe fetal abnormalities, holding that the MTP Act provisions must be read harmoniously to protect a woman's constitutional rights under Articles 14 and 21.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 20-week gestation limit constitutional validity Article 14

Shailendra Bahadur v. Union of India

09 Jul 2019 · Vipin Sanghi; Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2019:DHC:7739-DB

The Delhi High Court disposed of a writ petition after the respondents undertook to provide certified copies of records demanded by the petitioner within two weeks.

administrative petition_dismissed certified copies writ petition undertaking court disposal