Delhi High Court

58,912 judgments

Year:

Pentel Kabushiki Kaisha & Anr. v. M/S Arora Stationers & Ors.

08 Jan 2017 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2018:DHC:164

The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiffs' interim injunction application, holding that their registered ball point pen design lacked substantial novelty and originality required for protection under the Designs Act, 2000.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Designs Act 2000 Registered design Novelty and originality Interim injunction

M/S HDFC Bank Ltd. v. M/S Prem Power Construction Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

08 Jan 2017 · Sanjiv Khanna; Prathiba M. Singh · 2018:DHC:163-DB

The Delhi High Court held that sending winding up notices by registered post to the company's registered office as per official records constitutes valid service under the Companies Act, 1956, and set aside dismissal of the winding up petition for non-service.

corporate appeal_allowed Significant winding up notice Companies Act 1956 service of notice registered post

Feroz v. State NCT of Delhi

08 Jan 2017 · Vipin Sanghi; P. S. Teji · 2018:DHC:147-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the appellant's murder conviction under Section 302 IPC and convicted him under Section 304 Part-I IPC, holding that absence of motive and premeditation reduced the offence to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 304 IPC Exception IV to Section 300 IPC Section 106 Evidence Act

Lt. Col. Sube Singh Thukrana & Anr. v. Sajamuddin & Ors.

04 Jan 2017 · R. K. Gauba · 2018:DHC:89

The Delhi High Court enhanced the compensation awarded in a motor accident claim by applying the correct multiplier and future prospects percentage as per Supreme Court precedents and increased the interest rate to 9% per annum.

civil appeal_allowed Significant motor accident claim compensation loss of dependency future prospects

Unnati Welfare Organisation v. M/S Safety Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

01 Jan 2017 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2022:DHC:3890

The Delhi High Court decreed a summary suit for recovery of ₹4.09 crore with interest based on dishonoured cheques and a personal guarantee, granting injunction over secured property.

civil appeal_allowed Significant summary suit Order XXXVII CPC dishonoured cheque deed of personal guarantee

Prof. Sachin Maheshwari v. Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology & Anr.

24 Dec 2016 · V. Kameswar Rao, J · 2017:DHC:7701

The Delhi High Court held that while NSIT can prescribe higher eligibility criteria linked to higher pay scales for Director, such criteria must be approved by the Board of Governors and not solely by the President (Lt. Governor), quashing the impugned advertisement on procedural grounds.

administrative petition_allowed Significant AICTE Regulations 2010 Director appointment NSIT eligibility criteria higher pay scale

Naresh Kumar v. State of Delhi; Mahender Kumar v. State of Delhi

20 Dec 2016 · Gita Mittal; R.K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7920-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction and life sentences of two brothers for murder under Section 302/34 IPC based on credible eyewitness testimony and common intention, rejecting the defence of non-examination of a peripheral witness and challenges to related witnesses' credibility.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 302 IPC Section 34 IPC common intention related witnesses

Mahender Kumar v. State of Delhi

20 Dec 2016 · Gita Mittal; R.K. Gauba · 2017:DHC:7919-DB

Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I v. M/S Russian Technology Centre (P) Ltd

15 Dec 2016 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Najmi Waziri · 2017:DHC:7818-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's deletion of additions under Section 68, holding that the assessee discharged its burden to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of foreign share capital and loans through credible evidence.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 68 Income Tax Act share application money creditworthiness genuineness of transaction

N C Jindal Public School v. Directorate of Education

14 Dec 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:722
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court set aside the committee's order directing refund of excess development fees, holding that the school lawfully increased fees only from the permitted date and not retrospectively.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant development fee fee hike 6th Central Pay Commission Delhi School Education Act 1973

Chandan Prajapati v. Suresh Kumar Azad

14 Dec 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1486-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's order setting aside disciplinary proceedings for failure to prove documents through witnesses, reaffirming that documents alone cannot establish charges in departmental inquiries.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant departmental disciplinary proceedings proof of documents quasi-judicial inquiry witness testimony

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rekha Balyan & Ors.

07 Dec 2016 · J.R. Midha · 2017:DHC:7607

The Delhi High Court upheld the compensation awarded for death in a motor vehicle accident based on evidence of income and future prospects but set aside the penal interest imposed by the Claims Tribunal.

civil appeal_partially_allowed Significant compensation motor vehicle accident loss of dependency future prospects

Sanjay Tyagi v. Delhi Development Authority

25 Nov 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7082
Cites 1 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and directed disputes to be resolved under the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, overruling an unworkable arbitration clause.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(5) Appointment of arbitrator Delhi International Arbitration Centre

BMW India Private Limited v. Libra Automotives Private Limited & Ors.

23 Nov 2016 · Sanjeev Narula · 2019:DHC:3275

The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking interim security under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, holding that disputed claims and lack of clear intent to frustrate enforcement preclude granting such relief without crystallized liability.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act interim relief bank guarantee Order 38 Rule 5 CPC

M/S Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd v. Manav Sethi & Anr.

15 Nov 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5255

A Section 21 notice invoking arbitration is mandatory before filing a Section 11(6) petition for appointment of an arbitrator; absence of such notice renders the petition not maintainable.

arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Section 21 notice Section 11(6) petition Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Unilateral appointment of arbitrator

CMYK PRINTECH LTD. v. UNITED INDIA PERIODICALS PVT. LTD.

09 Nov 2016 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; A. K. CHAWLA · 2018:DHC:1866-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld a mediated settlement in a lease dispute, ruling that the appellant ratified its representative's authority despite a purported revocation, and dismissed the appeal seeking to set aside the settlement on grounds of fraud and lack of authority.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant settlement agreement authority of representative ratification Board Resolution

National Highway Authority of India v. GVK Jaipur Expressway Pvt. Ltd.

09 Nov 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:8818
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award granting compensation to a toll operator for loss of revenue due to statutory suspension of toll collection following demonetization, holding the event constituted a change in law under the concession agreement.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Change in Law Concession Agreement Demonetization Toll Collection

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. v. General Secretary, All India Kamgar Union

26 Oct 2016 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2024:DHC:1946

The Delhi High Court set aside a labor commissioner's award directing equal pay to contract workers, holding that no employer-employee relationship existed between the principal employer and contractor's employees performing dissimilar work.

labor appeal_allowed Significant equal pay for equal work contract labour principal to principal contract employer-employee relationship

Delhi Police v. Ajit Singh

25 Oct 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2024 SCC OnLine Del 8862
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court upheld that acquittal on benefit of doubt in criminal proceedings bars departmental action under Rule 12 of DPPAR, leading to quashing of disciplinary proceedings and reinstatement of the police officer.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant acquittal on benefit of doubt departmental proceedings Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeals) Rules, 1980 Rule 12 DPPAR