Delhi High Court
58,104 judgments
Sachin Kumar v. Ravi Ahuja & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that the statutory 120-day limit for filing a Written Statement in a civil suit is inviolable and delay beyond this period cannot be condoned, dismissing the appeal against closure of the right to file the Written Statement.
Vibhor Sahai & Ors. v. The State Govt NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual divorce between the parties, holding that continuing proceedings would be an abuse of the court process.
HERO INVESTCORP PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. v. ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS
The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and damages to the Plaintiffs against Defendants selling counterfeit 'HERO' motorcycle engine oil, holding that failure to contest the suit amounted to deemed admission of trademark and copyright infringement.
S. S. Verma v. Central Industrial Security Force
The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition filed after 14 years challenging a disciplinary penalty due to unexplained delay and held that delay must be cogently justified for condonation.
Urmil Mittal v. Tajoh Taloh
The Delhi High Court dismissed the contempt petition for non-compliance of its 2013 order, holding that substantial compliance was made and no wilful disobedience occurred.
Lt Cdr Sandeep Bhatnagar v. Director General Border Security Force & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the contempt petition alleging non-compliance of promotion orders, holding that substantial compliance was made and that merits of seniority claims cannot be adjudicated in contempt proceedings.
Lalit Mohan & Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed cross FIRs under serious IPC sections based on an amicable settlement, applying the principles governing quashing under Section 482 CrPC in non-compoundable offences.
Vineet Gupta v. M/S Indian Biodiesal Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiff's amendment application to include facts and reliefs consequential to impleading new defendants, holding that such amendments are permissible under CPC despite prior objections on limitation and relevance.
National Research Development Corporation and Another v. M/S MECPRO Heavy Engineering Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award dismissing royalty and technology transfer claims as barred by limitation, rejecting the petitioners' argument of a continuing cause of action.
INDIAN HIGHWAYS MANAGEMENT COMPANY LTD. v. PRAKASH ASPHALTINGS AND TOLL HIGHWAYS (INDIA) PVT LTD
The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award by the MSME Facilitation Council for lack of jurisdiction, holding that a non-MSE respondent providing services and retaining ownership of equipment does not qualify as a 'supplier' under the MSME Act.
Balbir Singh v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that retired CISF employees are not entitled to notional promotion when their juniors are promoted prospectively after their retirement, dismissing their petitions for retrospective promotion benefits.
KESRI STEELS LIMITED v. COMMISSIONER OF DELHI GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
The Delhi High Court set aside the order rejecting Kesri Steels Limited's refund application due to non-availability of records on the portal after original documents were verified, and remitted the matter for reconsideration.
Maneesh Trivedi v. Pallavi Trivedi
The Delhi High Court upheld the family court’s order granting Rs.40,000 monthly maintenance to the minor son under Section 125 Cr.P.C., dismissing the petitioner’s challenge to the quantum and findings of cruelty.
Prakash Kaur & Anr v. State (Government of NCT Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court directed equitable distribution of ex-gratia compensation among siblings for a 1984 riot victim's death, emphasizing constitutional principles over personal laws.
Sharad Gupta & Ors. v. Shri Vinayak Infraland Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
The court dismissed the application to refer the suit to arbitration under Section 8 as the suit involved non-signatory parties and the defendants failed to initiate arbitration within the limitation period.
R.K. Sharma v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a BSF officer convicted for possessing disproportionate assets, holding that the disciplinary proceedings were fair and no interference under Article 226 was warranted.
Shruti Katiyar v. Registrar General, Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court allowed a writ petition challenging a flawed answer key in the Delhi Judicial Services Preliminary Examination, holding that a time-barred claim cannot be claimed as set-off without qualifying conditions and awarding the petitioner marks accordingly.
M/S Jaiprakash Hyundai Consortium v. M/S Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the setting aside of an arbitral award on the ground that it was based on speculative calculations without evidence, reaffirming the limited scope of judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
Naushad Ali v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld a preventive detention order against a narcotics trafficker, ruling that delay in execution due to absconding does not invalidate the order if the detaining authority's satisfaction is based on sufficient material and procedural safeguards are met.
Sara Abode Private Limited v. Nath Brothers Exim International Limited
The Delhi High Court held that the statutory 120-day period for filing a written statement in a commercial suit is mandatory and cannot be extended by excluding mediation time, dismissing the petition challenging the trial court's closure of the petitioner's right to file the written statement.