Delhi High Court

49,371 judgments

Year:

Kailash Aggarwal v. Ashwani Sharma

14 Mar 2024 · Dharmesh Sharma · 2024:DHC:2033

The Delhi High Court held that a suit for consultancy fees under a contingent contract is not premature merely due to an unfulfilled condition on a cheque, but preliminary issues require trial evidence and cannot be decided on an Order VII Rule 11 CPC application alone.

civil appeal_allowed Significant contingent contract Order XXXVII CPC Order VII Rule 11 CPC premature suit

Surinder Kumar Pawan Kumar v. Shri Laxman Das Dhanwaria

14 Mar 2024 · Girish Kathpalia · 2024:DHC:2057

The Delhi High Court upheld an eviction order under the Delhi Rent Control Act, holding that summons were duly served by deemed service despite tenant's claims of non-service and that failure to file leave to contest justified eviction.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Delhi Rent Control Act eviction service of summons deemed service

Manoj v. State NCT of Delhi

14 Mar 2024 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2024:DHC:2074

The Delhi High Court granted furlough to a life convict with a satisfactory jail record despite prior parole violations, emphasizing corrective objectives and imposing strict conditions.

criminal petition_allowed Significant furlough parole life imprisonment Delhi Prison Rules, 2018

State v. Raja Ram

14 Mar 2024 · Suresh Kumar Kait; Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:3048-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the State's appeal and upheld the acquittal of the accused in a sexual assault case due to failure to prove the victim's minority and inconsistencies in prosecution evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant sexual assault minor victim age proof benefit of doubt

Ravinder Kumar @ Ravi and Ors. v. The State, NCT of Delhi & Anr.

14 Mar 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:2073

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 34 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act following an amicable settlement between the parties, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of the Court's process.

criminal petition_allowed Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC Dowry Prohibition Act

Narender Kumar & Anr. v. The State & Anr.

14 Mar 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:2071

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce between the parties, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process.

criminal petition_allowed Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR Section 498A IPC matrimonial dispute

Seagull Maritime Agencies Private Limited v. Union of India & Ors.

14 Mar 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:2447-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside ex-parte GST demand orders passed without proper service and hearing, remanding the matter for re-adjudication in accordance with natural justice principles.

tax other Significant Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Show Cause Notice ex-parte order natural justice

Deepali Panwar & Ors. v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

14 Mar 2024 · Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:2064

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR arising from matrimonial disputes under Sections 506, 509, 323, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

criminal petition_allowed Significant Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of FIR matrimonial dispute amicable settlement

Naresh Arya v. Savitri Kukreja

14 Mar 2024 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2024:DHC:2470

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's discretionary order directing interim compensation under Section 143A NI Act where the petitioner admitted issuance of dishonoured cheques and execution of sale deed, finding no ground for interference.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 143A Negotiable Instruments Act interim compensation dishonoured cheque prima facie case

Shree Girirajji and Co. v. Gagan Pagrani Proprietor of Plastica Industries

14 Mar 2024 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2024:DHC:2230-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court over a trademark infringement suit involving sales through an interactive website accessible in Delhi, dismissing the appellant’s challenge to the injunction and jurisdiction.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant trademark infringement passing off jurisdiction interactive website

M/S MAGNUM RESOURCES PVT LTD v. M/S INDIA SEWING MACHINE COMPANY & ANR

14 Mar 2024 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2024:DHC:2378

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's order allowing the respondents to summon additional witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C in a cheque dishonor case, emphasizing the discretionary power to ensure justice.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 311 Cr.P.C. summoning witnesses Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 NI Act

Bala Devi & Ors. v. Hukum Chand

14 Mar 2024 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2024:DHC:2454

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging an ex-parte order awarding earned wages under the Shops & Establishment Act, holding that non-appearance and unrebutted evidence justified the Authority's decision.

labor appeal_dismissed Delhi Shops & Establishment Act, 1954 earned wages ex-parte order writ jurisdiction

Shahid v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

14 Mar 2024 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2024:DHC:2488

The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction for theft under Sections 379/34 IPC but modified the sentence to the period already undergone by the petitioner, considering the nature of the offence and jail conduct.

criminal sentence_modified theft Section 379 IPC Section 34 IPC pickpocketing

Suman Kumar Pahuja v. State

14 Mar 2024 · Neena Bansal Krishna · 2024:DHC:2373

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition for grant of Probate or Letter of Administration of a duly executed Will despite both attesting witnesses being deceased, relying on proof through a legal representative and consent of all legal heirs.

civil petition_allowed Significant Indian Succession Act, 1925 Probate Letter of Administration Will execution

M/S Makker Construction v. Delhi Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation Ltd

14 Mar 2024 · Prateek Jalan · 2024:DHC:2110
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court allowed the petition for appointment of an arbitrator, holding that disputes under the contract with a final bill undertaking are arbitrable despite claims of accord and satisfaction and economic duress.

civil appeal_allowed Significant arbitration arbitrability accord and satisfaction economic duress

Yashpal Chaudhary v. Telecommunication Consultants India Ltd

14 Mar 2024 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:6991
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11(6) stage, the court must appoint an arbitrator if an arbitration agreement exists and the petition is timely, leaving limitation and other substantive issues to the arbitral tribunal.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(6) Section 21 notice appointment of arbitrator

Uttar Pradesh Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd v. P.O. Central Government Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court II & Anr.

14 Mar 2024 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:378-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal against the dismissal of a writ petition as infructuous following reinstatement and back wages paid to the workman, holding that no error was made in interpreting the counsel's statement and no grounds for review existed.

labor appeal_dismissed writ petition rendered infructuous review petition statement of counsel

M/S 3 SHADES EVENTS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR v. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND TAXES, GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

13 Mar 2024 · Sanjeev Sachdeva; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:2206-DB

Delhi High Court held that retrospective cancellation of GST registration requires objective satisfaction and proper reasons, modifying cancellation date to align with business closure.

tax appeal_allowed Significant GST registration cancellation retrospective cancellation Section 29(2) CGST Act Rule 21 CGST Rules

BAYER PHARM AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT v. THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS

13 Mar 2024 · Sanjeev Narula · 2024:DHC:2395

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal, holding that failure to communicate objections under Section 3(e) violated natural justice and that the claimed pharmaceutical composition did not fall within the method of treatment exclusion under Section 3(i) of the Patents Act, 1970.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Significant patent application Section 3(e) Patents Act Section 3(i) Patents Act method of treatment exclusion

Ankush Arora v. M/S Rachna Sarees and Anr.

13 Mar 2024 · Manoj Kumar Ohri · 2024:DHC:2375

The High Court quashed summons against a petitioner director in a Section 138 NI Act complaint for lack of specific averments showing he was in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the time of the offence.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 141 Negotiable Instruments Act Director liability Vicarious liability