Delhi High Court
93,075 judgments
Suresh Khanna v. OP Suri Memorial Education Society
The Delhi High Court allowed the defendant's application for condonation of delay in filing the written statement due to the serious illness of their counsel, holding that such illness constitutes sufficient cause for extension of time under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC.
Rakesh Kumar Sanwaria v. Guddi
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order fixing ad interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, dismissing the petition for lack of material irregularity or jurisdictional error.
Ved Prakash v. Suraj Saxena & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld eviction on bona fide requirement ground, affirming that such requirement is a recurring cause of action and must be assessed based on current need and availability of alternative accommodation.
M/S BHARAT BUILDTECH PVT LTD v. M/S VRPLANDBASEPVTLTD
The Delhi High Court dismissed the defendant's application for leave to defend a summary suit for Rs. 60 lakhs, holding the defense to be sham and granting summary judgment to the plaintiff with interest and costs.
Gaurav Virmani & Ors. v. The State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and mutual divorce, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.
Rohit Mittal & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from a matrimonial dispute following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC and Article 226 of the Constitution.
Shenzen OnePlus Technology Co Ltd v. Micromax Informatics Limited
The Delhi High Court set aside an injunction granted to Micromax against OnePlus, emphasizing the need for full pleadings and proper adjudication of competing software license rights before granting final relief.
Vijay Bhadana v. State
The Delhi High Court granted pre-arrest bail to petitioners in a forgery and cheating case after the forensic report did not incriminate them and investigation was near completion.
RSPL Health Pvt Ltd v. Rajesh M Nahta & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction to the plaintiff against defendants for infringing the registered trademark 'XPERT' but declined damages due to lack of evidence of infringing stock.
Nirmala Tomy v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the CAT’s dismissal of a service grievance on limitation grounds, holding that an unexplained delay of over 12 years in seeking remedy for an unconditional resignation is not excusable.
Nirmala Tomy v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the CAT's order dismissing the service-related claim due to inordinate delay and held that non-communication of resignation acceptance does not excuse delay in seeking remedy.
Pepsico Inc & Anr v. Vomara Distributors & Ors
The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction to PepsiCo against defendants for infringing and passing off the registered trademark AQUAFINA by using the deceptively similar mark AQUAFIZZA for packaged drinking water.
Ram Saroop v. Dhanni Devi and Others
The Delhi High Court allowed impleadment of a purchaser as a necessary party under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC and permitted amendments to the plaint to ensure complete adjudication of a property possession suit.
Gunender Kumar Jain v. Heritage Design Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking expert examination of a disputed cheque in a Section 138 NI Act case, holding that the accused’s own stand and evidence did not justify rebutting the statutory presumption.
Rathi Ispat Ltd v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors
The Delhi High Court held that once evidence recording has commenced under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a complaint case under Section 138 cannot be transferred on territorial jurisdiction grounds, dismissing the petition for transfer.
Deepak Rupani & Anr v. State & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from a commercial dispute on the basis of an amicable settlement, applying its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.
Hem Singh & Ors. v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the permissibility of filing evidence by affidavit subject to trial court scrutiny for admissibility, dismissing the petition challenging this procedure.
Shikha Mathur v. Anil Bahadur Mathur & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed the trial court's order allowing investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for offences under Sections 341 and 406 IPC, holding that no cognizable offence was made out given the petitioner's residence under a civil court stay order.
Ascent Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Parsvnath Buildwell Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed ACPL's petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act for reference to arbitration due to suppression of a full and final settlement and failure to disclose material facts.
M/S D.G. EXPORTS v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that the DGFT cannot impose export restrictions via circulars inconsistent with the Foreign Trade Policy, setting aside a circular requiring a NOC for export of bullet proof vests and directing specification of restricted military stores.