Delhi High Court

47,108 judgments

Year:

Pankaj Yadav v. Union of India and Ors.

03 Oct 2024 · Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur · 2024:DHC:7656-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court directed the Standing Screening Committee to consider the petitioner's acquittal and pass a reasoned order within 10 days on his candidature for CISF training, quashing mechanical referral based solely on an FIR.

administrative other Significant Article 226 Constitution of India writ petition certiorari Standing Screening Committee

M/S Jainsons Lights (Pvt) Ltd v. Ashraf

03 Oct 2024 · Girish Kathpalia · 2024:DHC:7596

The Delhi High Court dismissed the money recovery appeal, holding that the appellant failed to prove business transactions and delivery to establish jurisdiction and entitlement to the claimed amount.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant burden of proof territorial jurisdiction money recovery suit sale of goods

MS. G v. Union of India

03 Oct 2024 · Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2024:DHC:8296
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court directed the State and intermediaries to collaboratively and expeditiously remove and prevent dissemination of non-consensual intimate videos recorded without consent, affirming the legal duty to protect victims' privacy and dignity under the IT Act and constitutional provisions.

criminal petition_allowed Significant non-consensual intimate imagery privacy IT Act 2000 Section 67A IT Act

Campos Brothers Farms v. Matru Bhumi Supply Chain Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

03 Oct 2024 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2024:DHC:7897
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a foreign arbitral award, once final and unchallenged on merits, extinguishes the original cause of action, barring a subsequent suit on the same cause, and dismissed the plaintiff's suit as barred by res judicata.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant foreign arbitral award Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 enforcement of award res judicata

Ashish Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

03 Oct 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:7619

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A/34 IPC following an amicable settlement between the parties, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Section 498A IPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement matrimonial dispute

Prem Chand & Ors. v. State & Anr.

03 Oct 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:7618

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR involving minor offences under IPC on the basis of an amicable settlement between parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR amicable settlement minor offences

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd v. Shahan Parveen & Ors.

03 Oct 2024 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2024:DHC:7827

The Delhi High Court upheld the compensation award based on the deceased's salary as Rs. 12,500/- per month, rejecting the insurer's contention to apply minimum wages in absence of documentary proof.

motor_vehicles_criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Compensation Salary certificate Minimum wages

Ms. Manmeet Kaur, Mr. Gurtejpal Singh, Mr. Abhishek Rana, Ms. Aashna Arora v. Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd.

03 Oct 2024 · Dinesh Kumar Sharma · 2024:DHC:7815

The Delhi High Court held that recording satisfaction of an arbitral award under Order XXI Rule 2 CPC requires mutual consent and certification by the decree-holder, and dismissed the Judgment Debtors' applications alleging settlement without such consent or documentary proof.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXI Rule 2 CPC Section 47 CPC Arbitral Award enforcement Settlement agreement

Thijs, Roeland Michel Mathieu v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs

03 Oct 2024 · Amit Bansal · 2024:DHC:7758

The Delhi High Court allowed the restoration of a patent where the renewal notification was sent to an incorrect email address by the patent office, holding that the patent holder cannot be penalized for such communication errors.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant patent restoration renewal fee Indian Patents Act, 1970 Section 60

M/S Lenswire Innovations Private Limited & Anr. v. Indian Bank

03 Oct 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:7724

The Delhi High Court directed the trial court to verify compliance with mandatory service requirements under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 by obtaining process reports before deciding on summary dismissal applications.

civil other Significant Section 12A Commercial Courts Act 2015 service of summons non-starter report Order XIIIA CPC

M/S GTL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. v. BABU LAL YADAV

03 Oct 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:7723

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that an arbitration clause permitting unilateral appointment of the arbitrator is invalid and cannot be enforced under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 8 Section 37 arbitration agreement

Shilpi Sharma v. Praveen Sharma & Anr

03 Oct 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:7721

The Delhi High Court granted the petitioner one final opportunity to file her written statement in divorce proceedings subject to costs, setting aside the Family Court's order closing that right.

family appeal_allowed Family Courts Act, 1984 Article 227 Constitution of India written statement interlocutory order

M/S. TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. v. BABITA CHOPRA

03 Oct 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:7718

The Delhi High Court upheld the NCDRC's refusal to condone a 644-day delay in filing an appeal, holding that mere employee departure does not constitute sufficient cause under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

civil petition_dismissed Significant condonation of delay Section 5 Limitation Act National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Article 227 Constitution of India

Kamlesh Kumar Mishra v. Green Earth Infraventures Private Limited & Ors.

03 Oct 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:7717

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition under Article 227 challenging an NCDRC order for lack of jurisdiction, directing the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Chhattisgarh High Court as per Supreme Court precedent.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Article 227 jurisdiction National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission consumer dispute

Jyoti Shivadas v. Dr Krishnakumar

03 Oct 2024 · Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:7716
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that jurisdiction under Article 227 lies with the High Court where the cause of action arises and allowed withdrawal of the petition with liberty to approach the appropriate High Court.

constitutional petition_allowed Significant Article 227 jurisdiction National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission cause of action

Tapas Haldar v. State (G.N.C.T. of Delhi)

03 Oct 2024 · Prathiba M. Singh; Amit Sharma · 2024:DHC:7594-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the appellant's conviction for murder based on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence, rejecting challenges on delay, illegal detention, and last seen theory.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence last seen theory illegal detention recovery of weapon

Master Eklavya Kochhar & Ors. v. Bal Bharati Public School & Ors.

03 Oct 2024 · HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GE... · 2024:DHC:7703-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the school fees charged as per a rejected fee structure proposal, upholding the Directorate of Education's regulatory authority and leaving parties' rights open for adjudication.

administrative appeal_dismissed Directorate of Education fee structure private unaided schools fee hike

M/S Navansh Engineers and Consultants v. Union of India

03 Oct 2024 · Chief Justice Tushar Rao Gedela; Manmohan, ACJ · 2024:DHC:7702-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal upholding forfeiture of earnest money deposit where the bidder voluntarily and unconditionally revoked the tender bid without entitlement to a show cause notice.

civil appeal_dismissed earnest money deposit forfeiture revocation of bid tender process

Rajat Dilwali v. Rajesh Kumar Singh & Anr.

03 Oct 2024 · The Chief Justice; Tushar Rao Gedela · 2024:DHC:7701-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal holding that mere appearance by an advocate without filing a memo of appearance does not constitute sufficient service of summons in a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Order XXXVII CPC summary suit service of summons memo of appearance

Naveen Panchal v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

03 Oct 2024 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2024:DHC:7684

The Delhi High Court held that the accused can file documents for admission or denial under Section 294 Cr.P.C. after framing of charge, and allowed the accused's pen drive containing recorded conversations to be taken on record for admission/denial by the prosecution.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 294 Cr.P.C. admission and denial of documents electronic evidence pen drive