Delhi High Court
93,075 judgments
Sanofi India Ltd. & Anr. v. Universal Neutraceuticals Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court granted interim injunction restraining defendant's use of the mark UNIVERSAL and similar trade dress, holding it infringed plaintiffs' registered trademark and copyright and amounted to passing off.
Arvind Singhal & Ors. v. Max Therapiya Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that statutory permissions from ASI and MCD govern repair and use of property in protected residential zones, civil courts have limited jurisdiction, and unauthorized commercial use without sanction is impermissible but the suit is maintainable for civil rights enforcement.
M/S INNOVATIVE TEXTILES PVT. LTD & ANR v. SH. HEM CHAND SHARMA & ANR
The Delhi High Court dismissed the defendants' application to reject the plaint for lack of jurisdiction and maintainability, holding that the suit under Order XXXVII CPC is prima facie maintainable and the Court has jurisdiction.
Zile Singh v. State
The High Court upheld the order setting aside the trial court’s summoning of accused, holding that no prima facie case existed due to lack of credible evidence and discrepancies in investigation.
Union of India & Ors. v. Vinod Babu
The Delhi High Court held that furnishing adverse material at the stage of disagreement note cures initial non-furnishing in disciplinary proceedings and that judicial review of such proceedings is limited to ensuring findings are not wholly baseless or absurd.
Kartikrya Khanna v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279 and 338 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties at the preliminary investigation stage, applying the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Ramesh Chand Verma v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under the Electricity Act after the parties settled the dispute and the complainant withdrew prosecution, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Moninder Singh & Ors. v. The State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from matrimonial disputes under Sections 406, 498A, and 34 IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, applying its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Ved Kumar Chopra v. National Insurance Co. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim by applying the correct multiplier and future prospects principles from Sarla Verma, increased non-pecuniary damages, and rejected leave encashment due to lack of evidence.
Arvinder Singh v. Lal Pathlabs Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that non-compete clauses restraining doctors from practicing their profession are unenforceable under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, distinguishing professional practice from business and setting aside an injunction that barred the appellants from practicing as Pathologist and Radiologist.
Sunil Mashi @ Silly v. State NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the appellant's conviction under Sections 328 and 379 IPC for administering a sedative to facilitate theft and possession of stolen property, set aside the Section 411 IPC conviction, and modified the sentence considering his criminal antecedents.
Amit Kumar v. Govt of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a dowry harassment case, emphasizing cautious exercise of discretion under Section 438 CrPC and adherence to Supreme Court guidelines to prevent unnecessary arrest.
DEAR INVESTMENTS PVT LTD v. ADITYA BIRLA FINANCE LTD
The Delhi High Court held that failure to file a statement of claim does not mandate termination of entire arbitration proceedings and that challenges to usurious interest rates in arbitral awards require factual examination.
GEMS COMMERCIAL CO LTD v. ADITYA BIRLA FINANCE LTD
The Delhi High Court held that failure to file a statement of claim terminates only that claim and not the entire arbitration, and that challenges to usurious interest rates in arbitral awards require adjudication at the main petition stage.
Lovely Investments Pvt Ltd v. Aditya Birla Finance Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that failure to file a statement of claim does not terminate arbitration proceedings if a counterclaim exists, and challenges to usurious interest rates in arbitral awards require adjudication on merits.
General Exports and Credits Ltd v. Aditya Birla Finance Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that arbitration proceedings cannot be terminated solely due to non-filing of statement of claim if a counterclaim exists, and that challenges to usurious interest and purported admissions require holistic adjudication at the main petition stage.
M/S BOMBINO EXPRESS PVT. LTD v. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (DELHI ZONE)
The Delhi High Court upheld the revocation of an authorised courier's licence and penalty for failure to maintain proper records, forgery, and unauthorized outsourcing under the Courier Imports and Exports (Clearances) Regulations, 1998.
Usha Devi & Ors. v. Shri Ranjeet Singh
The Delhi High Court upheld eviction on bonafide necessity grounds, ruling that unsubstantiated claims of alternative accommodation do not create a bonafide triable issue and prior business experience is not required for eviction petitions under the Delhi Rent Control Act.
R.J. Mistry Sons & Ors. v. Himani Gupta & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the petition condoning a 13-day delay in filing the first appeal under the Delhi Rent Control Act, emphasizing that minor delays without malafides should be excused to enable hearing on merits.
Tilakraj Taneja v. Navin Soni & Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, holding that a dilapidated first floor is not suitable alternative accommodation and that tenants cannot raise new grounds beyond the 15-day statutory period for leave to defend.