Delhi High Court
92,628 judgments
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. R.G. Nagesan & Co
The Delhi High Court allowed extension of arbitration time under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and enforced the arbitral award as a decree against the defendant in an ex parte proceeding.
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. PL Finance & Investment Ltd.
The Delhi High Court allowed extension of arbitration proceedings under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 post-award and enforced the arbitral award as a decree against the defendant who failed to appear or object.
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. Llyods Finance Ltd
The Delhi High Court allowed extension of arbitration proceedings under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 post-award and enforced the arbitral award by passing a decree against the defendant in an ex parte suit.
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd v. Master Himanshu & Ors.
The High Court held that a party cannot be denied the right to lead evidence on the validity of a driving licence merely for not pleading it initially if the party subsequently obtains relevant information and allowed the petitioner to examine the witness from the Transport Authority.
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. Tushar Bedi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that it has power under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 to extend arbitration time even post-award and decreed the award in favor of the plaintiff against non-appearing defendants.
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. Consolidated Capital Financials Ltd.
The Delhi High Court allowed extension of arbitration time under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 post-award and decreed the arbitral award in favor of the plaintiff in an ex parte suit for recovery of underwriting liability.
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. India Securities Ltd.
The Delhi High Court allowed extension of arbitration time under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 post-award, made the arbitral award a rule of the Court, and passed a decree for Rs. 5.62 crore with interest against the defendant who failed to appear.
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. Poonam & Co
The Delhi High Court allowed extension of time under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 post-award, made the arbitral award a rule of the court, and passed decree with interest against the ex parte defendant.
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. Rajul K Shah & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, the Court can extend arbitration time even post-award and enforce the award as a decree in absence of objections by defendants.
M/S MS SHOES EAST LTD v. K.P. BIHANI & CO
The Delhi High Court allowed extension of arbitration time under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 post-award and decreed the arbitral award against the defendant who failed to appear or file objections.
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. Sareen & Co
The Delhi High Court allowed extension of arbitration time under Section 28 post-award and decreed the arbitral award in favor of the plaintiff due to defendant's non-appearance and failure to file objections.
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. Ramani & Co
The Delhi High Court allowed extension of arbitration time under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, made the arbitral award a rule of the Court, and passed decree against the defendant who failed to appear or file objections.
MS Shoes East Ltd. v. Vishwas Business Associates Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, time for arbitration proceedings can be extended post-award, and in absence of objections, the award can be made a rule of the court with a decree for recovery granted.
Smt Dulari Devi & Ors. v. Pooran Chand & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioners' request to release part of the amount deposited in a Fixed Deposit Receipt for constructing a pucca house, directing the bank to disburse Rs.1,00,000/- each to them.
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD v. A.K. PURI & ORS.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal and ordered release of the statutory deposit to it and the remaining compensation with interest to the claimants as per the motor accident award.
Cholamandalam MS General Ins. Co. Ltd v. Ashok Sharma & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurer’s appeal and directed release of the statutory amount to the insurer and the remaining compensation with interest to the claimants in a motor accident claim.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Chhote Lal Prasad & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the insurer's appeal in a motor accident claim, directing release of statutory deposit to insurer and balance compensation with interest to claimants as per the tribunal award.
SMT SAYARA & ORS. v. ORIENTAL INS CO LTD & ORS.
The Delhi High Court enhanced the compensation awarded for non-pecuniary damages in a motor accident death claim, emphasizing adequate relief for the dependants in line with Supreme Court precedent.
Bhai Sarabjit Singh v. Indu Sabharwal & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a suit to set aside a compromise decree on grounds of fraud is barred under Order 23 Rule 3A CPC and dismissed the plaintiff's suit challenging a Settlement Agreement arrived at through court mediation.
INTEX TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) LTD v. TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON AND ANR
The Delhi High Court held that the Competition Commission cannot pass final orders at the prima facie stage under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002, and investigations must proceed with judicial safeguards, applying consistent directions to related cases.