Delhi High Court

81,413 judgments

Year:

Kishinchand Choithram Daryanani v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

20 Jul 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:5759

The Delhi High Court directed respondents to dispose of the petitioner’s pending land exchange application within the stipulated time and restrained handing over possession until disposal.

property petition_allowed writ petition land exchange Land Reforms Act, 1954 disposal of applications

KANUNGO MEDIA PVT. LTD. v. RGV FILM FACTORY & ORS.

20 Jul 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:5779

Amendment to convert a passing off suit into a trademark infringement suit at the final arguments stage is not allowed as it introduces a fresh cause of action requiring fresh summons and a new suit may be filed instead.

civil petition_dismissed Significant amendment of plaint passing off trademark infringement Order VI Rule 17 CPC

Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. v. Satish Gujral

20 Jul 2015 · Valmiki J. Mehta · 2015:DHC:5781

The Delhi High Court held that the defendant artist breached the contract by failing to supply murals on the agreed subject "Speed" and ordered refund of the advance with interest, rejecting the claim for damages.

civil appeal_allowed Significant breach of contract advance payment murals subject matter

Commissioner of Service Tax v. Japan Airlines International Co. Ltd.

20 Jul 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Sanjiv Khanna; Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:5746-DB

The Delhi High Court held that the Committee of Commissioners' decision to institute an appeal under Section 86(2) of the Finance Act is an administrative act requiring no physical meeting or independent reasons if supported by material, limiting the Tribunal's role to verifying the existence of such decision.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 86 Finance Act Committee of Commissioners application of mind administrative function

Asif v. The State & Ors.

20 Jul 2015 · Indermeet Kaur · 2015:DHC:5763

The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in an assault case, holding that inconsistencies in prosecution evidence created reasonable doubt warranting benefit of doubt to the accused.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant appeal against acquittal benefit of doubt inconsistencies in evidence ocular testimony

Commissioner of Income Tax v. P.D Associates (P) Ltd.

20 Jul 2015 · S. Muralidhar; Vibhu Bakhru · 2015:DHC:11435-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed multiple income tax appeals by the Commissioner against P.D. Associates, holding no substantial question of law arose in view of a prior binding decision.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Income Tax Appeal Substantial Question of Law Judicial Consistency Tax Assessment

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

Harbans Singh Jolly & Anr v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

17 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5713

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under the Indian Electricity Act on the basis of an amicable settlement and No Dues Certificate, applying the principles governing quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR compromise in criminal cases Indian Electricity Act, 2003

Kishan v. State

17 Jul 2015 · Vipin Sanghi, J. · 2015:DHC:5696
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for armed robbery based on consistent eyewitness testimony, fingerprint evidence, and recovery of stolen property, rejecting defence challenges on procedural and evidentiary grounds.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant armed robbery identification parade fingerprint evidence disclosure statement

Narender Singh v. State NCT of Delhi

17 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5720

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279 and 337 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR compromise deed amicable settlement

Daya Lal & Anr v. State & Anr

17 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5717

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under the Indian Electricity Act based on an amicable settlement between parties, applying the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement Indian Electricity Act, 2003

Vikas Kumar v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

17 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5699

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279 and 338 IPC on the basis of settlement and compensation between parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR compromise in criminal cases Sections 279 and 338 IPC

Pankaj Soni & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

17 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5700

The Delhi High Court allowed quashing of a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 323, 325, 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement, applying the principles under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement matrimonial dispute

Ramesh Chand @ Ramesh Kumar v. State & Anr

17 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5701

The Delhi High Court quashed the trial court's order denying adjournment to file an application under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing the right to fair trial and directing a fresh opportunity subject to costs.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138 Section 145(2) fair trial

Anca Marian Neacsu v. Central Bureau of Investigation

17 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5702

Interim bail for medical treatment at a private hospital was denied to an accused in a serious Official Secrets Act case, but the court allowed medical examination and surgery in custody at the accused's expense.

criminal petition_dismissed interim bail medical treatment in custody serious offences Official Secrets Act

Sanjiv Narain Mathur v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

17 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5712

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 288 and 338 IPC on the basis of amicable settlement and absence of negligence, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR compromise in criminal cases settlement between parties

Atul Sarin & Anr v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

17 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:11180

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to quash an FIR for forgery and cheating, holding that serious offences involving multiple victims cannot be compromised or quashed based on a settlement.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant quashing of FIR forgery cheating Section 420 IPC

National Highways Authority of India v. M/S Sunway Construction Sdn Bhd

17 Jul 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:5719-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award directing payment of withheld contract amounts, clarifying that an indemnity clause does not permit withholding certified payments.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 petition indemnity clause withholding payment

Surinder Singh & Ors. v. State & Anr.

17 Jul 2015 · Suresh Kait · 2015:DHC:5710

The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and divorce, affirming the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash non-compoundable offences in such cases.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute non-compoundable offence

Amit Kapoor v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr

17 Jul 2015 · Suresh Kait, J. · 2015:DHC:5718

The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement, affirming the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash non-compoundable offences arising from matrimonial disputes.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute non-compoundable offence