Delhi High Court

62,488 judgments

Year:

Radhey Shyam v. Union of India and Ors.

17 Jul 2017 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; S.P. GARG · 2017:DHC:3606-DB

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition under the old Act lapses if compensation is not paid or tendered within the statutory period under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, declaring the petitioner’s acquisition lapsed due to non-payment.

property petition_allowed Significant land acquisition compensation lapse of acquisition Section 24(2) of 2013 Act

Mahak Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

17 Jul 2017 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; S. P. GARG · 2017:DHC:3607-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking declaration of lapse of land acquisition under the 2013 Act, holding that acquisition under the 1894 Act was complete with possession and compensation, and the petitioner lacked ownership and locus standi.

property petition_dismissed land acquisition Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 24(2)

Umed Singh v. Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board; Hemant Kumar v. Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board

17 Jul 2017 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2017:DHC:3583

The Delhi High Court held that the Member (Administration) of DUSIB is the competent disciplinary authority to issue show cause notices under Rule 19 of CCS (CCA) Rules, dismissing the petitioners' challenge to the notices issued post their absorption into DUSIB.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant disciplinary authority appointing authority show cause notice Rule 19 CCS (CCA) Rules 1965

Harmala Singh Malik & Anr v. State & Ors

17 Jul 2017 · Yogesh Khanna · 2017:DHC:3580

The Delhi High Court granted probate of a duly executed and registered Will with consent of all legal heirs, appointing the petitioners as executors of the estate.

civil petition_allowed probate Indian Succession Act, 1925 Will executors

Sanjeev Sharma v. Avinash Rastogi

17 Jul 2017 · Yogesh Khanna · 2017:DHC:3581

The Delhi High Court granted leave to defend in a suit for recovery based on dishonoured cheques, holding that a triable issue regarding losses and credit notes justified conditional leave despite prior conviction under Section 138 NI Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 37 CPC leave to defend dishonoured cheque Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act

Dimension Investment & Securities Ltd v. Uday Dutt Associates (P) Ltd

17 Jul 2017 · Yogesh Khanna · 2017:DHC:3574

The Delhi High Court ordered winding up of Uday Dutt Associates (P) Ltd under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 for retaining ₹8.6 crores under frivolous accounts without explanation and failing to respond to statutory notices.

corporate appeal_allowed Companies Act, 1956 Section 433(e) winding up Official Liquidator

Samira Tramix Pvt. Ltd. v. Official Liquidator

17 Jul 2017 · Yogesh Khanna · 2017:DHC:3575

The Delhi High Court allowed the Official Liquidator's petition for voluntary winding up of Samira Traxim Private Limited after finding full compliance with statutory requirements under the Companies Act, 1956.

corporate petition_allowed Companies Act 1956 Section 497 voluntary winding up Official Liquidator

State Govt of NCT of Delhi v. Banti

17 Jul 2017 · Pratibha Rani · 2017:DHC:3608

The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's leave petition challenging the acquittal in a rape and kidnapping case, holding that the trial court's judgment was not perverse despite contradictions and delay in FIR.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant acquittal rape kidnapping contradictions in evidence

Sunil Jain & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Jul 2017 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; S.P. GARG · 2017:DHC:3600-DB

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition lapses under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession and compensation payment are not completed within five years, allowing the petitioners' claim to ownership.

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

Yudhvir Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr.

17 Jul 2017 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; S.P. GARG · 2017:DHC:3601-DB

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition lapses under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is not paid or tendered within five years, and mere deposit in treasury is insufficient.

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

PEPSICO INC & ORS. v. DUGAR SPICES & EATABLES (P) LTD. & ORS.

17 Jul 2017 · Mukta Gupta · 2017:DHC:3618

Delhi High Court held it has jurisdiction over foreign defendants and granted permanent injunction against trademark infringement of the well-known KURKURE mark.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement passing off jurisdiction Section 62(2) Copyright Act

Anil Kapoor v. State

17 Jul 2017 · Manmohan · 2017:DHC:3577

The Delhi High Court granted Letters of Administration with the Will annexed to the sole legal heir after holding the Will validly executed and unchallenged.

civil petition_allowed Indian Succession Act, 1925 Letters of Administration Will Last Will and Testament

MODI- MUNDIPHARMA PVT. LTD v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

17 Jul 2017 · Vibhu Bakhru · 2017:DHC:3626

The Delhi High Court set aside the IPAB order cancelling the 'FECONTIN' trade mark, holding that use of an associated trade mark satisfies the use requirement under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 47(1) Section 55(1) associated trade marks

Sunil Kumar v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

17 Jul 2017 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; S.P. GARG · 2017:DHC:3605-DB

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition of land lapses under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is not paid or tendered within five years and possession is not taken, applying this to portions of the petitioner’s land where these conditions were unmet.

property petition_allowed Significant land acquisition Section 24(2) RFCTLARR Act 2013 compensation payment possession

Rattan Singh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

17 Jul 2017 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; S.P. GARG · 2017:DHC:3602-DB

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition of land lapses under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is not paid or tendered within five years, declaring the petitioner’s land acquisition lapsed due to non-payment and non-possession.

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

Lajjawati v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Jul 2017 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; S.P. GARG · 2017:DHC:3603-DB

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition lapses under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is not paid and possession not taken within five years, and mere deposit in treasury does not satisfy payment requirement.

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

Parmod Jain & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

17 Jul 2017 · S. RAVINDRA BHAT; S.P. GARG · 2017:DHC:3604-DB

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act due to non-payment of compensation and non-taking of possession, allowing the writ petition.

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

IP Support Services (India) Pvt. Ltd & Anr v. Millenium Plaza Limited & Anr

17 Jul 2017 · Deepa Sharma · 2017:DHC:3570

The Delhi High Court held that disputes relating to maintenance charges under agreements containing arbitration clauses are not arbitrable and dismissed the defendants' application to refer the suit to arbitration.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitration clause maintenance charges ownership rights Haryana Apartment Ownership Act

MEX SWITCHGEARS PVT. LTD v. OMEX CABLES INDUSTRIES & ANR.

17 Jul 2017 · Deepa Sharma · 2017:DHC:3573

The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's interim injunction application against defendants' use of 'OMEX GOLD', holding no deceptive similarity with the registered trademark 'MEX' and noting plaintiff's inordinate delay in filing suit.

civil petition_dismissed Significant trademark infringement deceptive similarity passing off interim injunction

Shree Nath Heritage Liquor Pvt Ltd & Anr. v. Octaga Green Power & Sugar Co Ltd & Ors.

17 Jul 2017 · Deepa Sharma · 2017:DHC:3571

The Delhi High Court dismissed the suit for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that mere apprehension of trademark infringement without actual business presence or imminent threat in Delhi does not confer jurisdiction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant territorial jurisdiction trade mark infringement passing off quia timet action