Delhi High Court
47,108 judgments
Tata Capital Ltd v. Unitech Associates & Ors.
The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate loan repayment disputes and directed the arbitrator to explore settlement through mediation before adjudication.
Bhawana Sharma & Ors. v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under minor IPC offences following an amicable settlement between neighbors, emphasizing the scope of Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process in such cases.
Central Govt. Employees Consumer Cooperative Society Ltd. v. Sgt Sanjeev Kumar
The Delhi High Court allowed the appellant's appeal partially, holding it entitled to recover INR 13,15,054 with reasonable interest from the respondent under a franchise agreement, while rejecting the respondent's counter claim for lack of evidence.
BRY-AIR (ASIA) PVT. LTD. v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition to quash the deemed withdrawal of a patent application caused by the negligence of the Patent Agent, restoring the application to enable prosecution.
Geeta Gandhi v. Central Bureau of Investigation
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition for CBI investigation into the alleged murder conspiracy but transferred the ongoing FIR investigation from Leh to Delhi Police for thorough inquiry.
Geeta Devi v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court awarded ex-gratia compensation for the death of an infant due to a dog bite but declined to hold the Municipal Corporation liable under writ jurisdiction due to disputed facts and private premises, leaving further negligence claims to civil courts.
Prashant Manchanda v. Union of India & Ors
Delhi High Court allowed DUSU voting but postponed vote counting until candidates remove election-related defacement and reimburse civic agencies, enforcing Lyngdoh Guidelines.
Govind T Samani v. Ashwin Aloysrus Dsouza & Anr
The Delhi High Court reduced an excessive bond amount fixed by the NCDRC under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, emphasizing that bonds must be reasonable and solely to ensure appearance.
M/S. SHELTER MAKER (I) PVT. LTD. & ORS. v. SHAKUNTALA S. AGARWAL & ORS.
Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging NCDRC orders for lack of territorial jurisdiction, directing the petitioner to approach the Bombay High Court as per Supreme Court precedent.
Shelter Maker Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Anand Mundra & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition under Article 227 for lack of jurisdiction, holding that consumer dispute challenges must be filed before the High Court where the cause of action arose, as per Supreme Court precedent.
Shelter Maker Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Babulal M Parekh & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition under Article 227 for lack of jurisdiction, holding that consumer dispute petitions must be filed before the High Court where the cause of action arose.
Shelter Maker I Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Kamalkumar S Bhagheria & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition under Article 227 for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that challenges to NCDRC orders must be filed before the High Court where the cause of action arose.
Shelter Maker I Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Ajit Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition under Article 227 for lack of territorial jurisdiction, reaffirming that consumer dispute petitions must be filed in the High Court where the cause of action arises.
Shelter Maker (I) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Santosh V Agarwal & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition under Article 227 for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the petitioners must approach the High Court where the cause of action arose, in line with Supreme Court precedent.
Shelter Maker I Pvt Ltd & Ors. v. Rameshbhai R Shah & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition under Article 227 for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the petition must be filed before the High Court having territorial jurisdiction over the cause of action.
Azimuddin v. Gagan Chandela
The Delhi High Court directed that evidence in two cross suits be recorded before the Trial Court itself instead of a Local Commissioner, dismissing the petition challenging the appointment to ensure expeditious disposal.
Mr. B P Singh Chauhan v. Vijender Singh
The Delhi High Court held that courts have discretion under Section 149 CPC to extend time for deposit of deficient Court Fee despite plaintiff's delay, and refusal to impose costs is not liable to interference.
Aamir Naseer v. Mohammad Zulfiquar
The High Court held that dismissal of an application for production of documents does not bar summoning a government official to prove the document during trial and allowed the petitioner to summon the official with costs.
Khokhar v. Syed Anzar Shah
The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's delayed appeal under Section 21 of the NIA Act against discharge in a UAPA case, holding that delay beyond the statutory 90-day limit cannot be condoned under the Limitation Act.
Yasir Ayaz v. State of NCT Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court recognized the UK High Court’s welfare jurisdiction over British children wrongfully retained in India and directed compliance with the UK court’s order for their contact and production.