Delhi High Court
93,075 judgments
Good Luck Traders v. M/S. Yash Associates & Ors.
Delhi courts lack territorial jurisdiction to try Section 138 NI Act complaints based on multi-city cheques presented at non-home branches; jurisdiction lies only where the cheque is dishonoured at the home branch.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
Delhi courts lack territorial jurisdiction to try Section 138 NI Act complaints based on multi-city cheques presented at non-home branches; jurisdiction lies only where the cheque is dishonoured at the home branch.
RAM KARAN0 v. LAND & BUILDING DEPARTMENT
The Delhi High Court condoned the delay in filing affidavits beyond the prescribed period and directed the respondent to consider the petitioners' applications for alternative plots on merits in accordance with law.
Anil Kumar Bana v. Chairman/MD, Food Corporation of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking compassionate appointment, holding that absence of vacancy within the prescribed quota and the petitioner’s adequate financial condition justified rejection of the claim despite delay.
Raghu Nandan v. State
The Delhi High Court upheld the appellant's conviction and life sentence for the brutal murder of his wife and injury to his daughter based on strong eyewitness and medical evidence, excluding the confession for motive but admitting it for presence and possession of the weapon.
MCD General Mazdoor Union v. MCD
The Delhi High Court delivered an oral judgment in a writ petition filed by the MCD General Mazdoor Union against the Municipal Corporation of Delhi concerning labor-related grievances.
Praveen Bhutani v. Usha Sethi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that an order condoning delay in filing an appeal under Section 372 Cr.P.C. is interlocutory and not subject to revision, and affirmed a 60-day reasonable limitation period for victim appeals in absence of statutory prescription.
Micromax Informatics Ltd v. Shenzhen OnePlus Technology Co Ltd & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted interim injunction protecting Micromax's exclusive license rights against OnePlus's infringement in India, holding that OnePlus's non-exclusive license governed by foreign jurisdiction cannot be enforced in Indian courts.
MS. BABITA KADIAN v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
The Delhi High Court allowed a writ petition directing appointment of an OBC candidate who rectified a procedural lapse in certificate submission before final selection, emphasizing substantive eligibility over technicalities.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
Delhi courts lack territorial jurisdiction to try Section 138 NI Act complaints based on multi-city cheques dishonoured at non-home branches; jurisdiction lies only where the drawee bank's home branch is situated.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
Delhi High Court held that courts have territorial jurisdiction under Section 138 NI Act only where the cheque is dishonoured by the home branch of the drawee bank, and presentation of multi-city cheques at non-home branches does not confer jurisdiction elsewhere.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
The Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction for prosecution under Section 138 NI Act lies only where the cheque is dishonoured by the home branch of the drawee bank, and presentation of multi-city cheques at non-home branches does not confer jurisdiction on courts at such places.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
Delhi High Court held that territorial jurisdiction for prosecution under Section 138 NI Act lies only where the cheque is dishonoured at the home branch of the drawee bank, and presentation of multi-city cheques at non-home branches does not confer jurisdiction on courts at such places.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
Delhi courts lack territorial jurisdiction to try Section 138 NI Act complaints for multi-city cheques dishonoured at the drawee bank's home branch outside Delhi.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
Delhi courts lack territorial jurisdiction to try Section 138 NI Act complaints for multi-city cheques dishonoured at the drawee bank's home branch, as held following the Supreme Court's ruling in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
Delhi courts lack territorial jurisdiction to try Section 138 NI Act complaints for multi-city cheques dishonoured outside Delhi; jurisdiction lies only where the drawee bank's home branch is located.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
The Delhi High Court held that courts have territorial jurisdiction under Section 138 NI Act only where the cheque is dishonoured by the home branch of the drawee bank, and presentation of multi-city cheques at non-home branches does not confer jurisdiction elsewhere.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
Delhi courts lack territorial jurisdiction to try Section 138 NI Act complaints based on multi-city cheques presented at non-home branches; jurisdiction lies only where the cheque is dishonoured by the home branch.
M/S DELTA PROTECH PVT LTD v. M/S MACWEL INTERIOR SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD
Breach of a mediation settlement agreement not embodied in a formal court decree does not constitute contempt of court under Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Rules.
M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD. v. State
Delhi courts lack territorial jurisdiction to try Section 138 NI Act complaints based on multi-city cheques presented at non-home branches; jurisdiction lies only where the cheque is dishonoured by the drawee bank's home branch.