Delhi High Court

92,628 judgments

Year:

Ram Manglani v. State & Ors.

30 May 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:2969

The Delhi High Court granted probate and Letters of Administration in favor of the petitioner after validating the duly executed Will and recording a compromise with the challenger.

civil petition_allowed probate petition Indian Succession Act validity of Will Letters of Administration

Orchid Deepak Diwan v. Raghu Printer Private Limited

30 May 2014 · Sanjeev Sachdeva · 2014:DHC:2972

The Delhi High Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation between Orchid Printers and Syndicate Printers under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956 after addressing regulatory concerns and undertakings on tax liabilities.

corporate petition_allowed Scheme of Amalgamation Companies Act 1956 Sections 391-394 appointed date

AEZ Infratech Pvt Ltd v. SNG Developers Ltd

30 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2962

The Delhi High Court held that where an arbitration agreement is admitted and relied upon in the suit, the court must refer the dispute to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act despite non-filing of the original or certified copy, and that a mandatory arbitration clause prevails over an exclusive jurisdiction clause conferring jurisdiction on courts.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 8 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arbitration agreement certified copy exclusive jurisdiction clause

AEZ Infratech Pvt Ltd v SNG Developers Ltd

30 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2963

The Delhi High Court held that where an arbitration clause is admitted and forms the basis of the suit, non-filing of the original or certified copy is not fatal, and the dispute must be referred to arbitration despite an exclusive jurisdiction clause.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 8 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 arbitration agreement certified copy exclusive jurisdiction clause

AEZ Infratech Pvt Ltd v SNG Developers Ltd

30 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2960

The Delhi High Court held that where an arbitration agreement is admitted and forms the basis of the suit, the court must refer the dispute to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act despite non-filing of the original or certified copy, and that an exclusive jurisdiction clause does not render the arbitration clause optional.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 8 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arbitration agreement certified copy exclusive jurisdiction clause

AEZ Infratech Pvt Ltd v SNG Developers Ltd

30 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2959

The Delhi High Court held that where an arbitration clause is admitted and forms the basis of the suit, non-filing of the original or certified copy under Section 8(2) is not fatal and directed reference of the dispute to arbitration despite an exclusive jurisdiction clause.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 8 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arbitration agreement certified copy exclusive jurisdiction clause

AEZ Infratech Pvt Ltd v SNG Developers Ltd

30 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2958

The Delhi High Court held that where an arbitration agreement is admitted and forms the basis of the suit, non-filing of the original or certified copy is not fatal and directed reference of the dispute to arbitration despite an exclusive jurisdiction clause.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 8 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arbitration agreement exclusive jurisdiction clause reference to arbitration

AEZ Infratech Pvt Ltd v SNG Developers Ltd

30 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2957

The Delhi High Court held that where an arbitration clause is admitted and forms the basis of the suit, the court must refer disputes to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act despite non-filing of the original or certified arbitration agreement and notwithstanding an exclusive jurisdiction clause.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 8 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arbitration agreement exclusive jurisdiction clause reference to arbitration

3M Innovative Properties Company & Anr v. M/S Venus Safety & Health Pvt Ltd & Anr

30 May 2014 · Manmohan Singh, J. · 2014:DHC:2964

The Delhi High Court granted interim injunction in a patent infringement suit, holding that a granted patent lacks presumption of validity and that defendants must raise a credible challenge to vacate injunction.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant patent infringement interim injunction presumption of validity prior art

Siri Ram Syal & Sons (Engineers) Pvt. Ltd. v. Ircon International Ltd.

30 May 2014 · Manmohan Singh · 2014:DHC:2965

The court held that once an arbitral award becomes a decree, it must be executed as per its terms, rejecting claims based on prior agreements and allowing interest only for delayed payments as per the decree.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant arbitral award execution of decree conversion rate foreign currency payment

AEZ Infratech Pvt Ltd v SNG Developers Ltd

30 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2954

The Delhi High Court held that where an arbitration agreement is admitted and relied upon in the suit, the court must refer the dispute to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act despite non-filing of the original or certified copy of the agreement.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 8 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arbitration agreement mandatory arbitration clause exclusive jurisdiction clause

AEZ Infratech Pvt Ltd v SNG Developers Ltd

30 May 2014 · Najmi Waziri · 2014:DHC:2955

The Delhi High Court held that where an arbitration clause is admitted and forms the basis of the suit, strict compliance with filing requirements under Section 8(2) is not mandatory and referred the dispute to arbitration despite a conflicting jurisdiction clause.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 8 application arbitration agreement jurisdiction clause

Joginder Singh Malik v. Central Bureau of Investigation

30 May 2014 · S. Muralidhar · 2014:DHC:2939
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a police sub-inspector for demanding and accepting bribe, affirming that conscious demand and acceptance proved by witness testimony and phenolphthalein test attract the presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Prevention of Corruption Act Section 7 PC Act Section 13(1)(d) PC Act Section 20 PC Act presumption

Procter & Gamble Manufacturing (Tianjin) Co. Ltd. & Ors. v. Anchor Health & Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd.

30 May 2014 · Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. · 2014:DHC:2936-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld an interim injunction restraining use of marks "ALL-AROUND PROTECTION" and "ALL-ROUNDER" as infringing the registered trademark "ALLROUND", recognizing slogans as protectable trademarks when distinctive.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant trademark infringement interim injunction descriptive mark slogan as trademark

TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LTD & ORS v. NATCO PHARMA LIMITED

30 May 2014 · THE CHIEF JUSTICE; RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. · 2014:DHC:2930-DB

Delhi High Court has territorial jurisdiction over a patent infringement suit concerning apprehended marketing within Delhi, and a defendant's statement of non-intention to market does not oust such jurisdiction.

civil appeal_allowed Significant process patent territorial jurisdiction Order 7 Rule 10 CPC Section 48(b) Patents Act

India Tourism Development Corporation Limited v. Susan Leigh Beer

30 May 2014 · S. Ravindra Bhat; Sudershan Kumar Misra · 2014:DHC:2937-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's finding of negligence against ITDC for a swimming pool injury under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, dismissing the appeal and affirming damages awarded to the plaintiff.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant res ipsa loquitur negligence swimming pool injury duty of care

Nisha Gupta v. Ram Kishan Gupta

30 May 2014 · Ved Prakash Vaish · 2014:DHC:2946

The Delhi High Court held that when signatures on cheques are admitted in a Section 138 NI Act complaint, forensic examination to determine the age of ink is unnecessary and dismissed the petition challenging the trial court's refusal to order such examination.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Dishonour of cheque Forensic examination Age of ink

Dr. Vijay Institute of Education and Technology v. All India Council for Technical Education

30 May 2014 · The Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:2945-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal seeking a second AICTE inspection for approval of a technical institute, holding that the appellant's failure to comply and obstructing inspection disentitled it from equitable relief.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant AICTE approval inspection equitable relief administrative finality

Ramesh Kirar v. The State (GNCT of Delhi) & Ors.

30 May 2014 · S.P. Garg · 2014:DHC:2943

The High Court of Delhi dismissed the criminal appeal of Ramesh Kirar by referring to a detailed common judgment in a related case.

criminal appeal_dismissed Procedural criminal appeal dismissal common judgment High Court of Delhi

Parivar Seva Sanstha v. Marie Stopes International

30 May 2014 · The Chief Justice; Rajiv Sahai Endlaw · 2014:DHC:2944-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant’s belated attempt to file additional documents in an eleven-year-old suit, holding that procedural discipline and appealability rules under the CPC must be respected to prevent trial delays.

civil appeal_dismissed Order VII Rule 14 CPC filing additional documents appealability of interlocutory orders procedural delay