Delhi High Court

65,687 judgments

Year:

Levi Strauss & Co. v. Rajesh Agarwal

03 Jan 2018 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2018:DHC:34

The Delhi High Court held that a Local Commissioner's report is admissible evidence without examination and that a trademark proprietor and its affiliates form one economic entity entitled to protection without assignment, allowing the appeal and granting permanent injunction against trademark infringement.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Local Commissioner report Order 26 Rule 10(2) CPC Trademark infringement Passing off

JPC Infrastructure and Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Alstom Systems India Pvt. Ltd.

03 Jan 2018 · Yogesh Khanna · 2018:DHC:33

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition for appointment of arbitrator as premature since the petitioner failed to follow the agreed ICC arbitration appointment procedure before approaching the court.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 Section 28 Section 2(6)

Vir Sanghvi v. Outlook Media Private Limited & Others

03 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:18

The High Court set aside the adjournment of a defamation complaint pending due to sealed tape evidence, directing the trial to proceed using copies available with investigative agencies.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 309(2) CrPC defamation tape recordings adjournment sine die

Anand Kumar & Anr. v. State & Ors.

03 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:17

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR arising from a minor road accident and scuffle after the parties amicably settled their disputes and agreed not to prosecute.

criminal petition_allowed quashing of FIR settlement minor scuffle road accident

Tarun Kapoor & Ors. v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

03 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:19

The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR and criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce between the parties.

criminal appeal_allowed quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute mutual consent divorce

Ashok Kumar Singhal v. Bimla Devi

03 Jan 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:21

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's review application against an order directing him to vacate disputed premises, holding that prior admissions on oath estopped him from denying the respondent's ownership.

civil petition_dismissed family settlement admission on oath review application abuse of process

Manu Kumaran & Anr v. Central Board of Film Certification & Anr

03 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:22

The Delhi High Court quashed the refusal of film certification for "Battle of Banaras," affirming filmmakers' constitutional right to portray social realities and directing re-examination with specific reference to certification guidelines.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant film certification freedom of speech and expression Article 19(1)(a) Central Board of Film Certification

M.L.GUPTA v. M/S. AERENS GOLD SOUK INTERNATIONAL LIMITED AND OTHERS

03 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:23

The Delhi High Court granted a part decree under Order XII Rule 6 CPC for repayment of admitted sums received by defendants as alleged loans, minus forfeitable earnest money under a disputed Agreement to Sell, with interest at 18% per annum.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC Agreement to Sell earnest money loan repayment

Gamesh Mathur & Ors. v. Prem alias Premvati & Ors.

03 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:24

The Delhi High Court decreed specific performance directing Defendant No. 3 to transfer her share in the suit land upon payment of the balance sale consideration plus an additional amount, due to her breach of the Agreement to Sell.

civil appeal_allowed specific performance agreement to sell immovable property No Objection Certificate

Manjit Chawla & Anr v. Sapna alias Vasundhra & Ors.

03 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:25

The Delhi High Court held that oral family arrangements and oral relinquishment of immovable property shares are not enforceable without all legal heirs' consent and evidence, granting plaintiffs one-third share in the partition suit properties.

civil appeal_allowed partition suit oral family arrangement oral relinquishment intestate succession

Jyoti Puri v. Pawan Gandhi & Ors.

03 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:26

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of the Wills executed by the deceased parents, dismissing the Plaintiff's claim for partition and share in the property, holding that the property devolved solely to the two brothers as per the Wills.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Partition suit Will validity Indian Succession Act 1925 Section 63

R.S. Dahiya v. State (Through NCT of Delhi)

03 Jan 2018 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2018:DHC:27-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld convictions of police officers for custodial death, ruling that addition of murder charge without fresh sanction was valid and refusal to recall witnesses was justified as the request was vexatious.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant custodial death Section 302 IPC Section 304 Part II IPC Section 34 IPC

M/S THREE-N-PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. v. M/S KAIRALI EXPORTS AND ANR.

03 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:28

The Delhi High Court held that the generic term "AYUR" does not confer exclusive trademark rights and refused injunction against the defendants' use of the composite mark "AYURVASTRA."

civil appeal_dismissed Significant trademark infringement passing off generic mark descriptive mark

M/S CASTROL LIMITED & ANR. v. IQBAL SINGH CHAWLA & ANR.

03 Jan 2018 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2018:DHC:29

The Delhi High Court held that defendants’ use of ‘LUMAX ACTIVE’ with identical trade dress infringed plaintiffs’ registered trademark ‘ACTIV’, copyright, and amounted to passing off, granting permanent injunction and damages.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement passing off trade dress copyright infringement

IMPRESARIO ENTERTAINMENT & HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD. v. S & D HOSPITALITY

03 Jan 2018 · Ms. Justice Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:14

Delhi High Court held it lacks territorial jurisdiction over a trademark infringement suit based on defendant's website accessibility, emphasizing the need for purposeful availment and real commercial transactions within the forum state.

civil other Significant territorial jurisdiction trademark infringement passing off purposeful availment

Mehtab v. State

03 Jan 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:16

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for voluntarily causing hurt and causing hurt with a sharp weapon based on reliable eyewitness identification and corroborative evidence, while modifying the sentence to the period already served.

criminal appeal_dismissed Identification of accused Section 323 IPC Section 324 IPC Section 34 IPC

Sunder v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

03 Jan 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:15

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant under Sections 308/34 and 427/34 IPC, holding that common intention and injured witness identification suffice to sustain conviction despite some witnesses resiling.

criminal appeal_dismissed Section 34 IPC common intention grievous injury stab injury

Abdul v. The State (NCT of Delhi)

03 Jan 2018 · Mukta Gupta · 2018:DHC:13

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction under Sections 394/34 IPC, holding that minor contradictions in the injured witness's testimony did not create reasonable doubt when corroborated by medical evidence and other material.

criminal appeal_dismissed robbery Section 394 IPC injury medical evidence

Dayanand Rajan & Anr. v. Ram Lal Khattar

03 Jan 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:11

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's dismissal of the appellant's claim that the suit property was HUF property, affirming that post-1956 inheritance does not create HUF property without clear proof of HUF existence or property thrown into common hotchpotch.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Hindu Undivided Family HUF property Hindu Succession Act 1956 joint family property

Vijay Pal Singh v. Usman Gani Ansari

03 Jan 2018 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:12

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court decree holding the appellant personally liable under a written settlement agreement and dismissed the appeal challenging recovery of Rs.3,50,000.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 91 Indian Evidence Act Written contract Non-joinder of parties Carrying and forwarding agent