Delhi High Court

36,666 judgments

Year:

Chandan Bhatia v. Satish Singhal & Anr.

26 Mar 2025 · Manoj Jain · 2025:DHC:2049

The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court’s order striking off the petitioner’s defense without a fresh show cause notice, as per prior directions, and dismissed the petition under Article 227.

civil petition_dismissed Section 151 CPC striking off defense show cause notice Article 227 Constitution of India

Sombir v. Union of India & Anr.

26 Mar 2025 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:2846-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh petition including additional challenges arising after the original filing.

constitutional appeal_allowed writ petition withdrawal of petition liberty to file fresh petition procedural fairness

F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG & Anr. v. Natco Pharma Limited

25 Mar 2025 · Mini Pushkarna · 2025:DHC:1907

The Delhi High Court clarified the appearances of counsel for interveners in interlocutory applications related to a commercial suit without addressing substantive issues.

civil other Procedural interlocutory application intervener appearance commercial suit

Bridgestone Corporation v. M/S. Merlin Rubber

25 Mar 2025 · Amit Bansal · 2025:DHC:1914
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and compensatory damages to Bridgestone Corporation against Merlin Rubber for deliberate trademark infringement and passing off using the deceptively similar mark 'BRIMESTONE'.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Trademark infringement Passing off Permanent injunction Compensatory damages

Delco Infrastructure Projects Ltd & Ors. v. Intec Capital Limited & Anr.

25 Mar 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:2133-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and refused to condone a 467-day delay in filing an appeal against an arbitral award, emphasizing strict adherence to timelines and requiring genuine sufficient cause for delay in commercial arbitration matters.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 Section 37 condonation of delay

Shushant Muttreja & Anr v. Ram Kumar Rathi & Anr

25 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:2568

The High Court held that a suit against a company in liquidation cannot proceed without leave of the Company Court under Section 446 of the Companies Act, and directors are not personally liable absent guarantees or fraud, setting aside the Trial Court's order allowing the suit to continue against the directors.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 446 Companies Act winding up Official Liquidator directors' liability

Raj Kumar v. Darshan Chawla

25 Mar 2025 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2025:DHC:2242
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The High Court dismissed the second appeal, upholding concurrent findings of fact that the plaintiff proved a loan transaction supported by an acknowledgment receipt and bank evidence, entitling recovery with interest.

civil appeal_dismissed Section 100 CPC second appeal concurrent findings of fact loan transaction

Delhi Development Authority v. Kalu Ram @ Kalu & Ors.

25 Mar 2025 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2025:DHC:2245

The Delhi High Court upheld the injunction protecting respondents' possession against forcible dispossession by DDA, emphasizing the necessity of due process and limiting adjudication of title in injunction suits.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant permanent injunction lawful possession dispossession due process of law

Chetan Nagi v. Ashwani Kumar Chaddha and Anr

25 Mar 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:2207

The Delhi High Court dismissed the tenant’s revision petition, holding that delay in filing leave to defend beyond the statutory period under the Delhi Rent Control Act was not condonable and upheld the eviction order on bona fide need grounds.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 eviction petition leave to defend condonation of delay

Ascot Hotel & Resorts Ltd and Anr v. Union of India & Anr

25 Mar 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:2217-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition partially, directing the petitioners to pay outstanding dues with concessional interest during litigation but upheld the contractual interest rate and recovery certificate terms for enforcement upon default.

civil petition_allowed Significant Debt Recovery Tribunal Recovery Certificate One Time Settlement Contractual Interest Rate

Pratistha Garg v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 25 Delhi

25 Mar 2025 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:1957-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that reassessment proceedings initiated under a second Section 148 notice beyond the limitation period are invalid and set aside such proceedings, emphasizing strict compliance with limitation and procedural requirements under the Income Tax Act.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 148A Income Tax Act Section 153C Income Tax Act limitation period

M/S DELCO INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PVT. LTD & Ors. v. INTEC CAPITAL LIMITED & Anr.

25 Mar 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:2055-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal seeking condonation of a 468-day delay in challenging a dismissal order under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, holding that the appellants failed to show sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant condonation of delay Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act Section 37 Arbitration and Conciliation Act Commercial Courts Act

National Highways Authority of India v. M/S C.P. Rama Rao Proprietor

25 Mar 2025 · Subramonium Prasad; Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar · 2025:DHC:2288-DB

The Delhi High Court partly allowed the appeal to remand the matter for reconsideration of the appellant's counter-claim which was rejected without reasons in the arbitral award and upheld by the Single Judge.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitral Award Counter-claim Force Majeure Demonetization

Valmik Thapar v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 18

25 Mar 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:2069-DB

Delhi High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment under Section 148 does not survive if the reasons recorded for reopening are not sustained and no additions are made on those grounds.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 147 Income Tax Act Section 148 Income Tax Act reopening of assessment capital gains deduction

Gurdeep Singh v. Jitender Pal Singh Narang & Anr

25 Mar 2025 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2025:DHC:2478
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside the dismissal of leave to defend in an eviction petition based on bona fide requirement, holding that a prima facie triable issue was raised regarding alternate accommodation and landlord's need.

property appeal_allowed Significant leave to defend bona fide requirement Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 eviction petition

Moonwalk Infra Projects Pvt Ltd v. S.R Constructions & Ors.

25 Mar 2025 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:2513

The Delhi High Court held that the arbitration clause specifying Delhi as the venue constitutes the seat of arbitration, conferring jurisdiction on it despite a generic jurisdiction clause in the purchase order favoring Begusarai courts, and appointed an arbitrator accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration clause seat of arbitration venue of arbitration jurisdiction

Shushant Muttreja & Anr v. Vinod Yadav

25 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:2566

The High Court held that suits against a company under winding up require leave of the Company Court and directors are not personally liable absent guarantees or fraud, setting aside the Trial Court's order allowing the suit to proceed against directors without such leave.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 446 Companies Act winding up Official Liquidator personal liability of directors

Shushant Muttreja & Anr v. Ram Kumar Rathi & Anr

25 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:2567

The High Court held that suits against a company under winding up cannot proceed without leave of the Company Court, and directors are not personally liable absent guarantees or fraud, directing the trial court to re-examine the suit's maintainability accordingly.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 446 Companies Act winding up provisional liquidator directors' personal liability

Shushant Muttreja & Anr v. Ram Kumar Rathi & Anr

25 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju, J. · 2025:DHC:2569
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The High Court held that suits against a company under winding up cannot proceed without leave of the Company Court, and directors are personally liable only if guarantees or fraud are pleaded, setting aside the Trial Court's order and remanding for fresh consideration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 446 Companies Act winding up Official Liquidator personal liability of directors

Shekhar Muttreja & Anr v. Peeyosh Aggarwal

25 Mar 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:2570

The High Court held that suits against a company in liquidation cannot proceed without leave under Section 446 of the Companies Act and directors are not personally liable absent guarantees or fraud, remanding the matter for fresh consideration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 446 Companies Act winding up Official Liquidator directors' personal liability