Delhi High Court

81,561 judgments

Year:

Anita Devi v. Indian Oil Corporation

06 Jul 2015 · Rajiv Shakdher · 2015:DHC:5242

The Delhi High Court set aside IOCL's orders de-empaneling Anita Devi for alleged false experience certificate due to violation of natural justice and directed fresh consideration of eligibility and selection including scrutiny of Anju Kumari's qualifications and experience.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant de-empanelment multiple dealership norm experience certificate natural justice

Shree Nath Heritage Liquor Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Allied Blender & Distillers Pvt. Ltd.

06 Jul 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2015:DHC:5235-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed appeals challenging injunctions restraining use of marks "Collector's Choice" and "Officer's Special" as deceptively similar to the registered trademark "Officer's Choice", emphasizing semantic similarity and likelihood of consumer confusion.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant trademark infringement passing off likelihood of confusion semantic similarity

Shree Nath Heritage Liquor Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Allied Blender & Distillers Pvt. Ltd.

06 Jul 2015 · Pradeep Nandrajog; Pratibha Rani · 2015:DHC:5236-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld interim injunctions restraining use of marks "Collector's Choice" and "Officer's Special" as deceptively similar to the registered trademark "Officer's Choice", emphasizing semantic similarity and consumer confusion.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant trademark infringement passing off likelihood of confusion semantic similarity

Paminder Gujral v. Kirnajit Gujral

06 Jul 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:5237-DB

The Delhi High Court held that orders dismissing transfer petitions under Section 24 of the CPC are interlocutory discretionary orders and not judgments, hence no appeal lies against them under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 24 Code of Civil Procedure transfer petition appealability Section 10 Delhi High Court Act

Paminder Gujral & Ors. v. Kirnajit Gujral & Anr.

06 Jul 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:5238-DB

An order dismissing a transfer petition under Section 24 of the CPC is interlocutory and not appealable under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act as it does not qualify as a judgment.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 24 CPC transfer petition appeal maintainability Section 10 Delhi High Court Act

Pappu Ramasare Chourasiya & Ors v. M/S Religare Finvest Ltd

06 Jul 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:5233-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against the dismissal of Section 34 objections, holding that proper service of notices and intentional avoidance by appellants validated the ex parte arbitral award.

civil appeal_dismissed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 objections ex parte award service of notice

NTPC v. Hindustan Construction Company Limited

06 Jul 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:5240-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a qualified statement in a Section 34 petition does not amount to an unequivocal admission of liability restricting the challenge to an arbitral award.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge admission of liability FIDIC contract

Tarun Chawla & Ors. v. State & Ors.

06 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5276

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 288, 337, 304, 304-A, and 34 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement, applying the principles governing quashing under Section 482 CrPC while ensuring the offences were not serious enough to preclude such relief.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR settlement between parties heinous offences

Mohit Yadav v. State of Delhi

06 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5280

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Section 308 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement between parties, applying the principles governing the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR Section 308 IPC compromise

Krishan Kant Gupta & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

06 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5283

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC based on a mediated settlement in a matrimonial dispute, emphasizing the sparing exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute Section 498-A IPC

Prempal Singh Mathur & Ors. v. State (NCT Delhi) & Ors.

06 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5281

The Delhi High Court allowed petitions to quash cross FIRs under IPC and SC/ST Act on the ground of amicable settlement between neighbors, applying principles of Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act compromise in criminal cases

Prempal Singh Mathur & Ors. v. State (NCT Delhi) & Ors.

06 Jul 2015 · Sunil Gaur · 2015:DHC:5282

The Delhi High Court quashed two cross FIRs under IPC and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on the ground of amicable settlement between neighbors, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act

Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd. v. Tattva Realtors Private Limited & Ors.

06 Jul 2015 · J. R. Midha · 2015:DHC:5284

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner's ex parte appointment of a receiver under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to repossess a vehicle securing a defaulted loan, subject to safeguards and arbitration proceedings.

civil petition_allowed Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 appointment of receiver interim relief loan default

Rajinder Kumar Aggarwal v. Union of India and Ors.

06 Jul 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:5274-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that mere deposit of compensation in court does not amount to payment under the 2013 Land Acquisition Act, and acquisition proceedings without possession or payment lapse after five years, with the 2015 Amendment Ordinance applying prospectively.

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

Riaz Munir Ahmad v. Union of India and Ors.

06 Jul 2015 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2015:DHC:5275
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a criminal conviction permits removal from service despite the benefit of probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, dismissing the petition challenging the removal of a university professor.

employment_service_law petition_dismissed Significant Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 Section 12 Probation of Offenders Act conviction and service removal disciplinary proceedings

Samir Chawla v. Sandeep Kapur

06 Jul 2015 · Hima Kohli · 2015:DHC:5285

The Delhi High Court accepted a court annexed mediation settlement in a summary suit, allowed refund of court fees under Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, and disposed of the suit accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed settlement agreement court annexed mediation refund of court fee Section 16 Court Fees Act

Bank of Baroda v. AVM Health Care Products Pvt. Ltd

06 Jul 2015 · G. S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal · 2015:DHC:5287-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the appellate tribunal's order remanding the impleadment application for reconsideration, affirming that while the plaintiff is dominus litis, courts can implead necessary parties following due process under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.

civil petition_dismissed Significant dominus litis impleadment Order 1 Rule 10 CPC Debt Recovery Tribunal

Avinash Tripathi v. Union of India and Ors.

06 Jul 2015 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Deepa Sharma · 2015:DHC:5286-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the denial of promotion to Assistant Executive Engineers who did not meet the prescribed 'Good' ACR grading benchmark, affirming uniform application of DoPT guidelines and rejecting claims based on administrative deviations.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Departmental Promotion Committee Annual Confidential Report ACR gradings promotion eligibility

Paminder Gujral & Ors. v. Kirnajit Gujral & Anr.

06 Jul 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:5234-DB

The Delhi High Court held that an order dismissing a transfer petition under Section 24 CPC is not a judgment and hence not appealable under Section 10(1) of the Delhi High Court Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 24 CPC transfer petition appealability Section 10 Delhi High Court Act

NTPC v. Hindustan Construction Company Limited

06 Jul 2015 · Badar Durrez Ahmed; Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2015:DHC:5239-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a qualified statement in a Section 34 petition does not amount to an unequivocal admission of liability, allowing the appellant to challenge all claims in the arbitral award.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Admission of liability FIDIC contract