Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Arrow Engineering Limited v. Punit Jitendra Chande & Anr.
The Bombay High Court set aside multiple arbitration awards for lack of reasoned decisions and held that contracts lacking certainty of property description are unenforceable, claims barred by limitation, and readiness to perform unproven, thereby allowing the Petitioner’s challenge.
Administrative Council Walchand College of Engineering v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that the Administrative Council is the lawful managing body of Walchand College of Engineering, quashing government nominations to a rival governing body constituted by the parent society.
M/s. Jagruti Foundation v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the State's discretionary grant and refusal of Letters of Intent for new colleges under the MPU Act, ruling the decision-making process was reasonable and not arbitrary.
Mr A.B.C. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court quashed an FIR under Section 376 IPC alleging rape based on a promise of marriage, holding that mere breach of promise without dishonest intent does not vitiate consent and the proceedings were instituted with ulterior motives.
Star Catalyst v. Commissioner of Delhi Value Added Tax
The Delhi High Court directed the tax authorities to process and pay the petitioner’s admissible VAT refund with statutory interest within four weeks or communicate reasons for denial.
M/S JAI SHRI BANKE BIHARI TRADERS v. UNION OF INDIA
The court held that provisional attachment orders under Section 83 of the CGST Act are valid for one year only, and while the challenged order had expired, the petitioner may challenge any fresh attachment order separately.
Babu Khan v. Zabuddin & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court’s refusal to admit a belatedly produced registered Will in a partition suit, emphasizing due diligence and Muslim law limitations on testamentary bequests.
S. Bhag Singh & Ors. v. M/S Harisons and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that the tenancy was validly terminated with rent exceeding Rs. 3,500, allowing the landlord's suit for possession and directing defendants to vacate the premises.
Mehboob Ahmad v. Muneer Ahmad & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that a device mark must be considered as a whole for distinctiveness under the Trade Marks Act and remanded the matter for consideration of objections under Section 11(1), directing advertisement of the mark accordingly.
Neeta Mahala and Ors. v. National Highways Authority of India
The Delhi High Court held that probationary service counts as regular service for promotion eligibility under NHAI regulations and allowed antedated promotion of petitioners accordingly.
Pawan Kumar & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A/34 IPC following an amicable settlement and mutual divorce between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
Tushar Sharma v. Graphic Advertising
The Delhi High Court quashed the summoning order under Section 138 NI Act against a petitioner not shown to be a partner or authorized signatory, holding that bald averments without unimpeachable evidence cannot sustain criminal liability under Section 141 NI Act.
Mohit v. Government of NCT Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 376 and 506 IPC based on an amicable settlement, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. while emphasizing caution in non-compoundable serious offences.
M/S Siddhi Ferrous v. M/S Uppal Builders
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal by disposing it on agreed terms requiring the appellant to pay the awarded principal sum with interest and costs, adjusting amounts already paid.
Vijay Kumar Agarwal v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.
The Delhi High Court upheld the framing of charges against the petitioner in a criminal case, holding that sufficient prima facie material existed and no denial of opportunity occurred, dismissing the petition challenging the charge framing order.
Sonu Choudary v. State of NCT Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction under Sections 324 and 452 IPC based on the reliable sole testimony of the injured witness corroborated by medical evidence, dismissing the appellant's challenge despite the other injured witness turning hostile and non-recovery of the weapon.
Shailendra Kumar Sharma v. Reserve Bank of India
The Delhi High Court held that the moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC applies only to the corporate debtor and does not stay proceedings against borrowers before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, dismissing the writ petition seeking such a stay.
Pankaj Oswal v. Vikas Pahwa
The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a defamation suit against a senior advocate, holding that statements made during judicial proceedings enjoy absolute privilege and are not actionable despite alleged harm to reputation.
Arti and Ors. v. Naveen and Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the petition to implead the Insurance Company as a necessary party in a motor accident claim, setting aside the MACT's orders that excluded the insurer and pre-judged the deceased's status before evidence was recorded.
Shraddha Shandilyayan v. Livecities Media Private Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that the statutory 120-day limit for filing a Written Statement under CPC and Delhi High Court Rules is a hard stop that cannot be extended, but set aside an ex parte order due to counsel's bereavement and condoned delay in re-filing the application to do so.