Delhi High Court
58,104 judgments
ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Dilkash Star Vision & Communication Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed ICICI Bank’s appeal and decreed recovery of an overdraft loan amount, holding that certified bank statements and loan documents suffice even without original recall notice, and procedural lapses in proving service do not defeat the bank’s claim.
M/S ICICI BANK LIMITED v. GAURAV & ANR
The Delhi High Court allowed the bank's appeal in a loan recovery suit, holding that procedural requirements under Section 65B of the Evidence Act are relaxable and certified electronic statements of account along with original loan documents suffice to prove the claim.
M/S ICICI BANK LIMITED v. AJEET KUMAR TRIPATHI
The Delhi High Court allowed the bank's appeal against summary dismissal of its loan recovery suit, remanding the case for one final opportunity to lead evidence considering procedural lapses and public interest.
Harbant Singh Mohal v. Bharat Khurana & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the Plaintiff's appeal to recover Rs. 7,00,000 with interest from Defendants who failed to substantiate their claim of profit adjustment and were found colluding in defrauding the Plaintiff.
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corp Ltd v. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission
The Delhi High Court upheld its earlier orders directing TANGEDCO to pay escalation charges as per CERC's June 2018 Notification effective from April 2017, rejecting objections to retrospective payments and enforcing compliance with its directions.
M/S FE (INDIA) LIMITED AND ORS. v. THE PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ORS
The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to initiate fresh proceedings, dismissing the petition as withdrawn and disposing of pending applications.
Nabin Chandra Patra v. M/S Maya Jewellers
The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte decree due to defective service and allowed the defendant to contest the suit, condoning delay in filing the appeal.
Vijaya Kumar M v. Union of India & Ors; Jay Prakash Sahu v. Union of India & Ors
The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioners to withdraw their petitions challenging government recruitment guidelines while reserving their right to future challenges.
Anurag Rajpal v. The American Swan Lifestyle Company Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that an arbitral award cannot impose liability on a non-signatory indirect shareholder and vacated interim asset restraint against TTN Ventures in enforcement proceedings.
INTERCONTINENTAL HOTELS GROUP (INDIA) PVT. LTD. & ANR. v. DUET INDIA HOTELS (HYDERABAD) PVT. LTD.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that the respondent's registered office was in Gurugram and the agreement was executed electronically with signatories outside Delhi.
INTERCONTINENTAL HOTELS GROUP (INDIA) PVT. LTD. & ANR. v. DUET INDIA HOTELS (AHMEDABAD) PVT. LTD.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that the contract was executed outside Delhi and the respondent's registered office had shifted to Gurugram.
Intercontinental Hotels Group (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Duet India Hotels (Chennai) Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that the agreement was executed electronically with the respondent's registered office in Gurugram, not Delhi.
INTERCONTINENTAL HOTELS GROUP (INDIA) PVT. LTD. v. DUET INDIA HOTELS (CHENNAI OMR) PVT. LTD.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that the agreement was executed outside Delhi and the respondent's registered office had validly shifted to Gurugram with due notice.
EMAAR MGF LAND LTD v. SUNITA
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award directing refund with 18% interest and costs, affirming the arbitrator's discretion under Section 31(7) of the Arbitration Act and rejecting the petitioner's challenge to reduce interest or costs.
Mohd. Lukman and Ors. v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed Tehbazari holders to vacate redevelopment sites by a specified date, allowing possession to be handed over in entirety to the contractor, while ensuring alternate accommodations are provided.
Mohd. Lukman and Ors. v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed Tehbazari holders to vacate redevelopment sites by a specified date, allowing possession to be handed over to the contractor under judicial monitoring, while ensuring alternate accommodation was offered.
Mohd. Lukman and Ors. v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed Tehbazari holders to vacate redevelopment sites by a specified date, allowing possession to be handed over to the contractor as per tender conditions, while providing for alternate sites.
L&T SUCG JV CC27 v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award rejecting the contractor's claim for reimbursement of additional customs duties imposed after contract execution, holding that the fixed lump sum contract inclusive of all taxes precluded such claims.
M/S ETERNITY FOOTWEAR LTD v. M/S THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award granting interest on delayed insurance claim payment from the date of insured's consent, affirming the insurer's liability under IRDA Regulations and dismissing the appellant's challenge to earlier interest commencement and rate.
Gautam Budha University v. M/S Efficient Book Distributors
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal by condoning delay in appearance filing due to alleged collusion and upheld Delhi court's jurisdiction despite a jurisdiction clause favoring Gautam Budh Nagar courts, permitting the Defendant University to defend the suit.