Delhi High Court
82,305 judgments
Mohd. Abid v. State (NCT of Delhi)
The Delhi High Court refused bail to accused in a gang rape case due to non-production of the prosecutrix and directed authorities to trace her for recording evidence before considering bail.
The New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Master Vipin & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that an insurer is liable to pay compensation to a motor accident victim even if the driver held a fake licence, with a right to recover the amount from the driver later.
Saroj Khemka v. Mukat Behari Khemka & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that prior institution of a suit and resistance to a Section 8 application does not bar invoking arbitration if the suit is withdrawn unconditionally, and appointed an arbitrator to resolve partnership disputes.
Institute of Directors v. Worlddevcorp Technology and Business Solutions Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed the plaintiff's interim injunction application, holding that prior admission of descriptiveness and common usage of words in its trademark disentitles it from exclusive rights against the defendants' similar mark.
Shiv Kumar Singh v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to decide the petitioner’s pending representation against his transfer within two weeks and stayed the transfer order for one week thereafter to protect his rights.
Sunita Devi v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner’s claim for seniority and increments was not barred by res judicata or constructive res judicata and remanded the matter for fresh consideration by the Tribunal.
Indian Hockey Federation v. UOI & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the recognition of Hockey India as the National Sports Federation for hockey, holding the petition infructuous in light of binding international arbitration and subsequent recognitions.
Union of India v. M/S. Navayuga Engineering Co. Ltd. & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that delay beyond the 120-day period under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot be condoned, and administrative delay does not constitute sufficient cause for such condonation.
SPML INFRA LIMITED v. GRAPHITE INDIA LIMITED
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging an arbitral award due to failure to show sufficient cause for delay beyond the strict limitation period and held that fundamental filing defects render the petition invalid to stop limitation.
Microsoft Corporation & Anr v. M/S Ajel Technologies Pvt Ltd & Anr
The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction against defendants for unauthorized use of pirated Microsoft software, based on unrebutted evidence and defendants' failure to appear.
Jiwan Ram v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court directed grant of one notional increment for pension calculation to a retired government employee, subject to the outcome of a pending Supreme Court Review Petition.
M/S. TULIP FASHIONS (P) LTD. v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession and compensation are not effected within five years prior to the 2013 Act's commencement.
PNB Housing Finance Ltd v. Ms. Pinky Aggarwal & Ors.
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 upon finding a valid arbitration agreement and timely petition, directing disputes to arbitration.
Sudesh Verma v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that land acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act with an award made over five years before the 2013 Act, without possession or compensation, are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
M/S M.R. TOWERS PVT. LTD. v. Union of India and Ors
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession and compensation are not completed within five years of the award.
Bhim Singh v. Govt of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that a government servant formally appointed to hold charge of a higher post outside his cadre is entitled to the pay of that post under FR 49(iii), quashing the Tribunal’s dismissal of the petitioner’s claim for pay difference as Store Keeper.
Rakesh and Anr v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession is not taken and compensation not paid within five years of the award.
BAL KISHAN v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings pending for over five years without possession or compensation under the 1894 Act are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act.
M/S MKM ESTATES PVT LTD v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act where possession was not taken and compensation not paid within five years of the award are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
Hazel Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession and compensation are not completed within five years of the award.