Delhi High Court

59,687 judgments

Year:

Krishan @ Krishan Pal Tanwar v. Rohtas Kumar Verma

17 Sep 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:6017

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of the respondent in a cheque bounce case, holding that the appellant failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable debt and that the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act was rebutted.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 139 Negotiable Instruments Act Dishonour of cheque Legally enforceable debt

Karim Baksh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

17 Sep 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:6049-DB

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings lapse if physical possession is not taken and compensation not paid, but title disputes must be decided in appropriate proceedings.

property petition_allowed Significant land acquisition Section 24(2) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 physical possession

Ram Babu v. State

17 Sep 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:6013-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and life sentence of the appellant for murder based on a complete chain of circumstances and reliable witness testimony.

criminal appeal_dismissed murder Section 302 IPC chain of circumstances circumstantial evidence

Navigators Logistics Ltd. v. Kashif Qureshi & Ors.

17 Sep 2018 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2018:DHC:6014

The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for copyright infringement, breach of confidentiality, and enforcement of non-compete clauses, holding that customer lists lack copyright protection, confidentiality claims were vague, and post-employment non-compete clauses are void under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act.

civil petition_dismissed Significant copyright customer database confidential information trade secrets

Pankaj v. State

17 Sep 2018 · S. Muralidhar; Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:6021-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence of the appellant for aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a child, emphasizing the reliability of the child victim's testimony corroborated by medical and forensic evidence, and enhanced victim compensation.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant POCSO Act child sexual assault child witness testimony forensic evidence

Ashwani Khattar v. Vijay Kumar Bhatia

17 Sep 2018 · G.S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:6054-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging an arbitral award on limitation grounds, affirming that the agreement was terminated by efflux of time and the appellant's claims were barred due to delay and insufficient evidence.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Limitation Commercial Courts Act, 2015 Indian Contract Act, 1872

INTAS Pharmaceuticals Limited v. Union of India

17 Sep 2018 · Vibhu Bahru · 2018:DHC:6022

The Delhi High Court held that novel pharmaceutical formulations developed through incremental innovation are excluded from price control under DPCO-2013 unless specifically included, and remanded the matter to NPPA to reassess the pricing applicability to INTAS's dispersible Cefixime tablets.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Drugs (Price Control) Order, 2013 scheduled formulation ceiling price dispersible tablet

M/S ILFS ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED v. M/S INDIAN STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVES LIMITED

16 Sep 2018 · C. Hari Shankar · 2021:DHC:1358

The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner’s claims were prima facie arbitrable under the contract and Arbitration Act, and appointed an arbitrator to proceed with arbitration despite the respondent’s objections.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration agreement arbitrability Section 11(6) Arbitration Act claim notification

Anju Saxena v. Sarvam Diamond International; Anju Saxena v. Monicca Jain

14 Sep 2018 · A. K. Pathak · 2018:DHC:8266

The Delhi High Court held that only the drawer who signs a cheque can be prosecuted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, quashing complaints against a non-drawer petitioner.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act drawer of cheque dishonour of cheque joint account holder liability

Prime Comfort Products Private Limited v. Lal Bahadur Trading as Sulakshmi Enterprises

14 Sep 2018 · Yogesh Khanna · 2018:DHC:5979

Delhi High Court held it has territorial jurisdiction over a trademark infringement suit based on plaintiff's registered office and defendant's pan-India sales, dismissing defendant's summary judgment application.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction trademark infringement passing off Order XIIIA Commercial Courts Act

M/S EARTHCON CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD v. M/S MAHAMAYA INFRABUILD PVT. LTD

14 Sep 2018 · Navin Chawla · 2018:DHC:5999
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that an arbitral tribunal's order terminating arbitration proceedings by mutual consent under Section 32(2)(b) is final and bars fresh arbitration or appointment of a new arbitrator under Sections 14 or 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 14 Section 15 Section 32 termination

Pradyuman Kumar Aggarwal & Ors. v. Orchid Salon Services Pvt Ltd. & Anr.

14 Sep 2018 · Yogesh Khanna · 2018:DHC:5980

The court held that a registered lease deed prohibiting sub-letting governs possession rights, rejected oral claims, and granted possession and arrears recovery to the landlord on admitted facts without triable issues.

civil appeal_allowed lease deed sub-letting possession arrears of rent

Dinesh Tiwari v. State

14 Sep 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:5985

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Dinesh Tiwari for penetrative sexual assault on a minor under the POCSO Act and IPC, dismissing his appeal challenging the evidence and sentence.

criminal appeal_dismissed POCSO Act Section 6 POCSO Section 376(f) IPC penetrative sexual assault

Raju v. Neelam; Ram Rati v. Jai Singh

14 Sep 2018 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw

The Delhi High Court held that appeals against Family Court orders setting aside ex-parte decrees under the Hindu Marriage Act lie before a Division Bench under the Family Courts Act, while orders under Section 125 CrPC by the Family Court are not appealable but subject to Criminal Revision, rendering writ petitions under Article 227 not maintainable.

family appeal_dismissed Significant Family Courts Act, 1984 Order IX Rule 13 CPC Section 125 CrPC Article 227 Constitution

Santosh v. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd

14 Sep 2018 · J. R. Midha · 2018:DHC:6004

Delhi High Court enhanced compensation from Rs.4.18 lakh to Rs.11 lakh in a motor accident claim, increasing disability assessment and non-pecuniary damages while upholding contributory negligence deduction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation enhancement permanent disability functional disability

Poonam Kumari v. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited & Ors.

14 Sep 2018 · J.R. Midha · 2018:DHC:6006

The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation from Rs.3.9 lakh to Rs.12.5 lakh for a child victim of a bus accident, recognizing loss of earning capacity, disfigurement, and future medical expenses as valid heads of damages.

civil appeal_allowed Significant compensation enhancement permanent disability loss of earning capacity pain and suffering

Mother Dairy, Calcutta v. Mother Dairy Fruits & Vegetables Pvt Ltd

14 Sep 2018 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A. K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:9149-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal to frame the issue of territorial jurisdiction in a trademark infringement suit, holding that jurisdictional objections based on Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act can be raised notwithstanding prior waiver under Section 21 CPC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant territorial jurisdiction Section 21 CPC Section 134 Trade Marks Act amendment of issues

M/S ICICI BANK LTD. v. HEMA GERA

14 Sep 2018 · ANU MALHOTRA · 2018:DHC:6000

The Delhi High Court allowed ICICI Bank's appeal and appointed an ex-parte receiver to repossess a hypothecated vehicle due to the borrower's loan default and risk of alienation.

civil appeal_allowed Significant ex-parte receiver hypothecation vehicle repossession loan default

M/S ICICI BANK LTD. v. SHAKTI SINGH AND ANR.

14 Sep 2018 · ANU MALHOTRA · 2018:DHC:6001

The Delhi High Court allowed ICICI Bank's appeal and appointed an ex-parte receiver to repossess a hypothecated vehicle due to the borrower's loan default and risk of disposal.

civil appeal_allowed Significant ex-parte receiver hypothecation loan default repossession

Dev Raj & Ors. v. Satpal Gulia

14 Sep 2018 · Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2018:DHC:6009

The Delhi High Court dismissed the Second Appeal for lack of substantial question of law, holding that applications under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC are to be decided with the appeal and courts are not obliged to order demarcation suo moto in civil property disputes.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Second Appeal Order XLI Rule 27 CPC demarcation permanent injunction