Delhi High Court
92,849 judgments
AR Aerotech Private Limited v. AR Airways Private Limited
The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between AR Aerotech Private Limited and AR Airways Private Limited under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, after finding no objections or prejudice to stakeholders.
Kohinoor Club Private Limited v. T.S. Kisan and Company Private Limited
The Delhi High Court allowed the Scheme of Amalgamation of a wholly owned subsidiary with its holding company, dispensing with meetings of shareholders and creditors and holding no separate application by the holding company was required under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956.
M/S P-KAL INFOTECH PVT LTD v. M/S PERTO S.A. & ORS
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that the disputed clause did not constitute a binding arbitration agreement and thus the court lacked jurisdiction.
Manpreet Singh & Co. v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation
The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award rejecting compensation claims under an "as is where is" tender clause and confirmed liability for unauthorized possession beyond contract period.
Chunbuda v. State
The Delhi High Court acquitted the appellant of murder due to insufficient circumstantial evidence and failure to exclude reasonable doubt.
Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Anglo French Drugs & Industries Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that the trademarks OXETOL and EXITOL are not deceptively similar given the differences in products and usage, and thus no infringement under the Trade Marks Act was established.
Southern Infosys Limited v. The Registrar of Companies
The Delhi High Court allowed restoration of Southern Infosys Limited's name in the Register of Companies under Section 560(6) of the Companies Act, 1956, subject to payment of costs and filing of outstanding statutory documents.
Sh Rakesh Kapoor v. Late Smt Krishna Pyari thr Legal Heirs & Anr
The Delhi High Court upheld an eviction order based on the landlords' bona fide residential need, rejecting the tenant's challenge that commercial premises could serve as alternate accommodation.
Chander Sekhar & Anr. v. The State & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal case under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC based on an amicable settlement and compensation paid, applying its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in a commercial dispute.
Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/S The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld deletion of penalty under Section 13 of the Interest Tax Act, 1974, holding that bona fide legal differences on taxability of interest income preclude penalty imposition.
United Teleservices Pvt. Ltd. v. Celestial Tech Vates Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld its jurisdiction to try a cheque dishonour complaint under Section 138 NI Act where the cheque was issued and delivered in Delhi, dismissing the petition challenging territorial jurisdiction after trial evidence had commenced.
United Teleservices Pvt. Ltd. v. Celestial Tech Vates Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's jurisdiction in a Section 138 NI Act cheque dishonour case, affirming that jurisdiction is not solely based on place of cheque presentation or dishonour notice.
FRONTLINE NCR BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. v. STATE & ANR.
The Delhi High Court held that the trial court must allow recalling a witness for further cross-examination under Section 311 Cr.P.C. when incomplete evidence is produced, to ensure justice is done.
National Insurance Co Ltd v. Shreejay Kumar Sinha & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award holding the DTC bus driver liable for rash and negligent driving causing injury to a passenger, dismissing the insurer's appeal despite a police closure report.
Paritosh Budhiraja v. Urmila Rani & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a tenant's right under Section 19 of the Slum Area Act requiring prior permission for eviction can be waived, and failure to raise this objection at the proper stage results in dismissal of the petition challenging eviction.
Rameshwar Dayal & Ors. v. Satish @ Satbir & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 323, 452, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between parties during investigation, applying the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with reference to Supreme Court guidelines.
Smarttrust Infosolution Private Limited v. Giesecke & Devrient India Private Limited
The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between two companies under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 after ensuring statutory compliance and absence of objections.
Genpact India Investments v. Genpact India
The Delhi High Court sanctioned a Scheme of Amalgamation involving a Mauritius-incorporated Transferor Company, subject to foreign jurisdiction approval and statutory compliance.
Aradhana Foods and Juices Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. PepsiCo India Holdings Private Limited
The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between Aradhana Foods and Lehar Foods with PepsiCo India Holdings under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956, approving the merger without requiring a separate application by the Transferee Company and after ensuring statutory compliances.
Supreme Payment Services Private Limited v. United Forex Private Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between two transferor companies and a transferee company under sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, after satisfying procedural and regulatory compliance with no objections.