Delhi High Court

75,184 judgments

Year:

Dr. Omesh Chander Kashyap v. Union of India

09 Dec 2015 · Ashutosh Kumar, J. · 2015:DHC:10067

Bharat Bhushan & Anr. v. Kanta Devi & Anr.

09 Dec 2015 · Ashutosh Kumar, J. · 2015:DHC:10068

Anil Kumar & Anr. v. Govt. of NCT Delhi

09 Dec 2015 · Ashutosh Kumar · 2015:DHC:10069

Varun Capital Services Ltd v. Rajesh Kumar

09 Dec 2015 · Ashutosh Kumar · 2015:DHC:10070

The Revenue v. Radio Today Broadcasting Ltd

09 Dec 2015 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2015:DHC:10063-DB

Vandana v. Government of NCT of Delhi

08 Dec 2015 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015:DHC:10168-DB

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS v. UDAL SINGH

30 Oct 2015 · C. HARI SHANKAR; TUSHAR RAO GEDELA · 2024:DHC:8855-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of disciplinary proceedings against a teacher on the ground that the chargesheet and punishment were issued by authorities lacking jurisdiction under the CCS (CCA) Rules after his elevation to Group 'B' status.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings competent authority Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 Group B officers

M/S DRS LOGISTICS (P) LTD & ANR. v. GOOGLE INDIA PVT LTD & ORS.

27 Oct 2015 · V. KAMESWAR RAO · 2021:DHC:3482

The Delhi High Court held that use of registered trademarks as backend keywords in Google's advertising platform does not constitute trademark infringement or passing off, and Google is entitled to intermediary protection under the IT Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant trademark infringement keywords meta-tags Google AdWords

IACUITY TELCO SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. v. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.

27 Oct 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7081
Cites 1 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court held that the plea of limitation cannot be decided at the stage of appointment of arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and directed reference of disputes to arbitration under DIAC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(5) Limitation Appointment of arbitrator

M/S ABL BIOTECHNOLOGIES LTD & ORS v. M/S TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT BOARD & ANR

23 Oct 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7277

The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award passed by an arbitrator unilaterally appointed by one party, holding such appointment invalid even before the 2015 amendment to the Arbitration Act.

civil petition_allowed Significant arbitration unilateral appointment arbitral award nullity ab initio

Meena Aggarwal v. Punjab National Bank & Ors.

14 Oct 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta · 2016:DHC:463-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a Recovery Officer under the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 has no power to take physical possession of immovable property before sale, and transferred the execution proceedings to another officer to prevent abuse of process.

civil other Significant Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 Recovery Officer Physical possession Execution proceedings

Shakib v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

12 Oct 2015 · Sunita Gupta · 2016:DHC:8372

The Delhi High Court dismissed anticipatory bail applications as withdrawn after the FIR was quashed, emphasizing that quashing renders bail applications infructuous.

criminal petition_dismissed anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC FIR quashing non-bailable warrant

Chirag Stock and Securities Pvt. Limited v. Union of India & Anr.

29 Sep 2015 · J.R. Midha · 2016:DHC:8321

The Delhi High Court issued procedural orders in an arbitration petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by Chirag Stock and Securities Pvt. Limited against Union of India, with no substantive decision recorded in the provided text.

civil other Procedural Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator arbitration petition

Ashok Kumar Kharya v. State of NCT of Delhi

09 Sep 2015 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2023:DHC:5795
Cites 1 · Cited by 6

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a supplementary chargesheet filed without prior court permission and dismissed the petition seeking quashing of the summoning order against the petitioner accused of criminal breach of trust and cheating in a housing society land fraud case.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant supplementary chargesheet Section 173(8) CrPC fair investigation Article 21 Constitution

S Rajagopal v. Union of India and Ors.

07 Sep 2015 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1794-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 45

The High Court held that disputes regarding entitlement to Ex-Serviceman status and ESM identity cards for retired armed forces personnel drawing pro-rata pension fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Armed Forces Tribunal, and the writ petition is not maintainable before the High Court.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Ex-Serviceman status Armed Forces Tribunal jurisdiction pro-rata pension Kendriya Sainik Board

C.S. Malik v. Council of Scientific & Industrial Research & Anr

31 Aug 2015 · C. Hari Shankar; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2024:DHC:8856-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court quashed a hastily issued charge sheet against a retired CSIR officer for violating natural justice and directed payment of interest on delayed retirement benefits, while upholding procedural safeguards for post-retirement disciplinary action.

administrative petition_allowed Significant disciplinary proceedings superannuation charge sheet natural justice

Sepoy Balwan Choudhary v. Union of India

27 Aug 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2016 DHC 8847

The Delhi High Court held that the reduction in rank and imprisonment imposed on a soldier for assaulting a superior officer was disproportionate given provocation by the superior, and restored the soldier’s rank and benefits.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Army Act Section 40(a) Summary Court Martial Disproportionate punishment