Delhi High Court

72,805 judgments

Year:

Shiv Prakash Katiyar v. Jawahar Lal University & Ors.

27 Jul 2015 · C. Hari Shankar; Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2024:DHC:8097-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that an interlocutory order issuing notice without deciding any controversy is not a "judgment" under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, and thus the Letters Patent Appeal against such order is not maintainable.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Letters Patent Appeal judgment definition interlocutory order Clause 10 Letters Patent

Zenith Dance Institute Pvt. Ltd. v. Zenith Dancing and Music

18 Jul 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:4901
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the plaintiff's priority and injunction against the defendant's use of the mark "ZENITH" for dance education services, applying estoppel principles to limit claims based on the plaintiff's registered word mark but allowing infringement claims based on the device mark.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement estoppel approbate and reprobate likelihood of confusion

Vinod Kumar Yadav v. Central Board of Secondary Education and Anr

16 Jul 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:753

The Delhi High Court held that permanent debarment for unfair means requires an independent inquiry and opportunity of hearing, and set aside the CBSE order against the petitioner for reconsideration.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant unfair means permanent debarment CBSE Information Bulletin natural justice

Sanjiv Mittal v. The Registrar of Trade Marks and Ors.

02 Jul 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:4547

The Delhi High Court set aside the Trade Marks Registry's order substituting registered proprietors without hearing the original registrants and remanded the matter for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of hearing.

intellectual_property petition_allowed Significant Trade Marks Registry Substitution of proprietors Right to be heard Audi alteram partem

M/S G.S BERAR AND CO. PVT. LTD. & ANR v. M/S TRANS ASIAN INDUSTRIES EXPOSITIONS PVT. LTD

01 Jul 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2022:DHC:2202

The Delhi High Court dismissed a Section 340 CrPC application for initiating criminal proceedings under Section 209 IPC against a respondent, holding that disputed civil claims without clear evidence of dishonesty do not constitute a criminal offence.

criminal petition_dismissed Section 340 CrPC Section 209 IPC Dishonestly making false claim in court Export Credit Guarantee Corporation

Jagdish Chander v. Delhi Transport Corporation

30 Jun 2015 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:844-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition directing the DTC to pay pensionary benefits from superannuation subject to the petitioner returning CPF benefits with interest, quashing the CAT order without deciding the broader legal question.

administrative appeal_allowed pension optee Contributory Provident Fund pensionary benefits reinstatement

Rewant Ahlawat v. Central Board of Secondary Education

25 Jun 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:3098

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking correction of date of birth in a CBSE certificate beyond the prescribed limitation period, holding that statutory bye-laws and procedural requirements must be respected and courts cannot override them under Article 226.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant date of birth correction CBSE bye-laws limitation period Article 226

Viterra B.V. v. Sharp Corp Limited

25 Jun 2015 · C. Hari Shankar
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed contempt petitions against Sharp Corp Ltd., holding that the sale of a charged immovable property to satisfy prior financial institution rights did not constitute wilful disobedience of its injunction order.

civil petition_dismissed Significant civil contempt wilful disobedience prior charge injunction

Kenisha Agrawal v. Union of India

24 Jun 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:2041
Cites 1 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court upheld the exclusion of OCI holders from representing India in the final International Mathematical Olympiads, affirming that only Indian citizens have this right under existing law and policy.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Overseas Citizen of India International Mathematical Olympiad Citizenship Act 1955 Indian citizenship

Senjil Gupta v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation

05 Jun 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2019:DHC:514
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that appeals under Section 347D of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, lie only against orders confirming, modifying, or annulling orders or notices under Sections 343 or 347B, excluding interlocutory orders under the CPC.

civil other Significant Section 347D Delhi Municipal Corporation Act Appellate jurisdiction Interlocutory orders Order XXII Rule 10 CPC

Sarabjeet Singh Sethi v. Deputy Director of Education, North West, Government of NCT Delhi & Ors.

04 Jun 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:720

The Delhi High Court held that divorce and remarriage do not extinguish a biological father's right to have his name recorded as the father in school records, directing correction of such records accordingly.

family petition_allowed Significant biological father parental rights school records divorce

Through: Mr. R.K. Saini, Mr. Minal Sehgal, Advocates v. GURU HARKRISHAN PUBLIC SCHOOL (NEW DELHI SOCIETY) &

29 May 2015 · HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA; To be referred to the R... · 2017:DHC:1673

The Delhi High Court held that transfer of an employee between branches of a private unaided school under the same management is valid if a common seniority list is maintained and the employment terms permit such transfer, dismissing the petitioner’s challenge to his transfer.

labor petition_dismissed Significant transfer of employee private unaided school common seniority list terms and conditions of employment

Harjit Kaur v. Surinder Singh

23 May 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Yogesh Khanna · 2016:DHC:7566-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the wife's appeal, setting aside the divorce decree granted on grounds of cruelty, holding that the husband's extramarital affair during marriage constituted cruelty and the wife was denied a fair opportunity to prove it.

family appeal_allowed Significant cruelty extramarital affair Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 divorce

Maruti Traders v. Itron India Pvt Ltd

15 May 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5291

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award dismissing the petitioner’s claims for exclusive dealership and commission, holding that no valid contract existed prior to the Reseller Agreement and that the respondent’s direct sales and appointment of other resellers did not breach the non-exclusive reseller agreement.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Reseller Agreement Non-exclusive dealership

Duttmenon Dunmorsett v. Union of India

14 May 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; A. K. Chawla · 2018:DHC:4217-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 6

The Delhi High Court held that reimbursements for senior counsel fees cannot be included in the taxable value of services under the Finance Act, 1994 prior to the 2015 amendment, quashing the service tax demand on such reimbursements.

tax petition_allowed Significant service tax valuation of taxable services reimbursements Finance Act 1994

Gagan Sharma v. The Secretary, Services Department Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

11 May 2015 · Jyoti Singh · 2023:DHC:4208
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed a belated claim for compassionate appointment by the son of a deceased Work Charge employee, reaffirming that such appointments must be granted promptly to families facing immediate financial crisis and are not a vested right.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant compassionate appointment delay laches financial crisis

Mandir Shri Krishan Bhagwan & Anr v. Union of India & Ors

10 May 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:3737-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years from the award date.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 acquisition proceedings lapse non-payment of compensation

Sanjay Khanna v. M/S Vasu Tech Ltd. & Ors.

06 May 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2016:DHC:3576

The Delhi High Court dismissed defendant's leave to defend application in a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC, holding that a corporate guarantee with personal endorsement constitutes a written contract and that frivolous defenses of duress cannot defeat recovery.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Corporate Guarantee Order XXXVII CPC Leave to defend Written contract

Shiv Lal v. Govt of NCT of Delhi

02 May 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:3405-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation remains unpaid for over five years, granting the petitioners a declaration of lapse.

property petition_allowed Significant Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Section 24(2) acquisition proceedings lapse

Shiv Lal v. Govt of NCT of Delhi

02 May 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2016:DHC:3408-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation is not paid within five years of the award, regardless of possession claims.

property petition_allowed Significant Section 24(2) RTFCTLARR Act 2013 Land Acquisition Act 1894 compensation non-payment acquisition proceedings lapse