Delhi High Court

46,132 judgments

Year:

Gillanders Arbuthnot and Co. Limited v. Steel Authority of India Limited

20 Nov 2024 · Vibhu Bakhru; Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:8913-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court restored an arbitral award holding SAIL's claims barred by limitation, ruling that post-termination contractual clauses do not extend limitation and arbitration claims must be filed within the prescribed period.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Limitation Act, 1963 International commercial arbitration Contract termination

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 v. M/S Agroha Fincap Ltd.

20 Nov 2024 · Vibhu BakhrU; Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2024:DHC:8919-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The High Court held that reassessment under Section 147/148 is valid in absence of jurisdictional satisfaction under Section 153C, allowing the Revenue's appeal and restoring the matter to ITAT.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 147 Section 148 Section 153C

Daisy Distributors Pvt. Ltd. v. The Income Tax Officer Ward 7(1) New Delhi

20 Nov 2024 · Vibhu Bakhru; Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2024:DHC:8920-DB

The Delhi High Court held that in absence of material handed over from a searched person, the Assessing Officer can validly reopen assessments under Section 148 and is not restricted to proceedings under Section 153C.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 153C search proceedings

Sukhvinder Kumar Bhardwaj v. Smt Vinita

20 Nov 2024 · Girish Kathpalia · 2024:DHC:8993

The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court's suo motu preliminary decree for recovery of possession in a residential tenancy dispute, rejecting the appellant's jurisdictional and procedural objections.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC suo motu decree tenancy jurisdiction commercial tenancy

Mohd Amin Deceased through LRs v. Mohd Iqbal Deceased through LRs

20 Nov 2024 · Vibhu BakhrU; Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:8912-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award directing reversion of disputed land and costs, applying Section 14 of the Limitation Act to exclude time spent in execution proceedings, but set aside compensation for demolished constructions due to lack of evidence.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Limitation Act, 1963 Section 14(1) Limitation Act Execution proceedings

Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Sh. Satya Pal Gupta

20 Nov 2024 · Vibhu Bahru; Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:8968-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld escalation claims under contract wage revision clauses but set aside damages for loss of profit due to delay for lack of evidence, limiting judicial interference in arbitral awards.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Escalation Clause 10C Loss of profit damages

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -7, Delhi v. Naveen Kumar Gupta

20 Nov 2024 · Vibhu BakhrU; Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2024:DHC:8917-DB

The Delhi High Court held that Section 153C of the Income Tax Act applies only if its conditions are met and does not bar reassessment under Section 147 where those conditions are not satisfied.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 153C Income Tax Act Section 147 Income Tax Act Reassessment Search and Seizure

Vineet Taneja v. Ritu Taneja

20 Nov 2024 · Neena Bansal Krishna

The Delhi High Court held that court-appointed counsellors in guardianship cases are not witnesses subject to cross-examination, but parties may cross-examine opposing party witnesses, emphasizing the child's welfare as paramount.

family appeal_allowed Significant guardianship visitation rights court-appointed counsellors cross-examination

Aktivortho Private Limited v. Dilbagh Singh Sachdeva

20 Nov 2024 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2024:DHC:8963-DB
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging an arbitral award upholding rent payment obligations under a commercial lease with a lock-in period, emphasizing limited judicial interference in arbitration awards.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award Section 34 Arbitration Act Lease Deed Lock-in Period

Sarabjeet Singh v. Anup Sharma & Ors.

20 Nov 2024 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2024:DHC:8964-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the plaintiff was not continuously ready and willing to perform the Agreements to Sell and thus not entitled to specific performance.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant specific performance readiness and willingness agreement to sell breach of contract

Harmaninder Kaur v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

20 Nov 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:9026

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking allotment of a flat due to automatic cancellation for non-payment and long delay, but directed refund of the deposited amount.

property petition_dismissed Significant writ of mandamus housing allotment automatic cancellation laches

MS Lion Security Guards Services; MS Aakanksha Enterprises; MS Rekart Innovations Pvt Ltd v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

20 Nov 2024 · Manmohan, CJ; Tushar Rao Gedela, J · 2024:DHC:9038-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the rejection of a joint venture's technical bid for non-compliance with essential tender conditions relating to Power of Attorney execution and inconsistent designation of lead member.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant tender process technical bid Power of Attorney joint venture

Navigators Logistics Ltd v. Kashif Qureshi & Ors.

20 Nov 2024 · Vibhu BakhrU; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2024:DHC:8965-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal against rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, holding that the plaint disclosed a cause of action and that post-employment non-compete clauses are void under Section 27 of the Contract Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order VII Rule 11 CPC cause of action copyright infringement confidential information

Pawan Chaudhry & Anr. v. Nimesh Jain & Ors.

20 Nov 2024 · Vikas Mahajan · 2024:DHC:9021
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a suit involving allegations of forgery cannot be decreed under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC merely due to defendants' failure to file written statements without evidence proving the disputed facts.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Order VIII Rule 10 CPC deemed admission failure to file written statement disputed questions of fact

M/S M.H. ONE TV NETWORK PVT. LTD. v. M/S MH 7 NEWS AND ANR.

20 Nov 2024 · Mini Pushkarna · 2024:DHC:9048

The Delhi High Court cancelled the respondent's trademark registration for 'MH7' due to deceptive similarity with the petitioner's prior registered trademark 'MH1/MH ONE', affirming protection against infringement and unfair competition.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement deceptive similarity prior use goodwill

Staff Selection Commission & Ors. v. Abhishek

20 Nov 2024 · C. Hari Shankar; Amit Sharma · 2024:DHC:9052-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing a re-medical examination by a dermatologist to assess the respondent's fitness for Delhi Police Constable recruitment in light of tattoo restrictions, dismissing the petition challenging it.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant re-medical examination tattoo restriction functional fitness Central Administrative Tribunal

Apollo Supply Chain Pvt. Ltd v. M/S Jalan Transolutions (India) Ltd

20 Nov 2024 · Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:8981
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11 stage, only the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement is to be examined and appointed a sole arbitrator despite respondent's claim of accord and satisfaction.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant arbitration agreement Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act appointment of arbitrator accord and satisfaction

VCARE TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD v. MR NIKHIL RAI

20 Nov 2024 · Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:9045

The Delhi High Court appointed a Sole Arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 upon confirming the existence of a valid arbitration agreement, leaving all substantive disputes to arbitration.

civil petition_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 12 arbitration agreement

M/S SOMA NEW TOWNS PVT LTD v. M/S VIKAS BUILDMART PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS

20 Nov 2024 · Sachin Datta

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising from a share purchase agreement, directing arbitration as per the contract and Arbitration Act provisions.

civil appeal_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 Section 12 Section 17

SNAP ON TOOLS PRIVATE LIMITED v. MS METRICS APPLICATIONS

20 Nov 2024 · Sachin Datta · 2024:DHC:8982
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate disputes arising from a reseller agreement where parties failed to agree on arbitrator appointment.

arbitration petition_allowed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator Sole arbitrator appointment Authorised Reseller Agreement