Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Yudhveer Yadav v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition after respondents clarified that no restrainment or demolition orders were passed against the petitioner's property, supported by affidavits and site plans.
Ankit Handa & Ors. v. State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes following a bona fide settlement and mutual consent divorce between the parties.
Subhendu Jha & Ors. v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes after the parties amicably settled and obtained a mutual consent divorce.
Union of India v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd
The Delhi High Court affirmed that DTA suppliers to EOUs are entitled to refund of Terminal Excise Duty under the Foreign Trade Policy, with refunds processed via reversal of CENVAT credit or cash payment, following the Supreme Court's ruling in Sandoz Private Limited.
Mr. Paranjan Chopra, Advocate v. STATE NCT OF DELHI .....
The Delhi High Court granted one-month parole to a life convict on humanitarian grounds despite previous parole violations, emphasizing parole’s rehabilitative purpose and the need to balance societal and family interests.
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd v. Cian Healthcare Ltd
The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and cancelled the defendant's trademark registration for deceptively similar use of "MGalin" infringing the plaintiff's well-known pharmaceutical trademark "Maxgalin".
Dhananjay Kumar Mishra and Ors. v. Airports Authority of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed AAI's review petitions, holding that contractual experience in Executive cadre posts in Government/PSUs qualifies for eligibility and the minimum CTC condition applies only to private sector candidates.
ESSEMM LOGISTICS v. DARCL LOGISTICS LIMITED
The Supreme Court held that the mandatory notice under Section 16 of the Carriage by Road Act, 2007 applies only to claims for loss or damage to consignment and does not bar counter-claims for other consequential losses against a common carrier.
Nitu Devi Somvanshi v. Rajendra Singh Somvanshi @ Tinku
The Supreme Court allowed the transfer of family court proceedings from Alwar, Rajasthan to Bhiwani, Haryana in the interest of justice with directions for expeditious disposal.
Nitu Devi Somvanshi v. Rajendra Singh Somvanshi @ Tinku
The Supreme Court allowed the transfer of family court proceedings from Rajasthan to Haryana in the interest of justice and disposed of the related contempt petition.
Malviya v. Rakesh Malviya
The Supreme Court clarified that it can use its constitutional powers under Article 142 to waive or reduce the statutory six-month waiting period for divorce by mutual consent under the Hindu Marriage Act in exceptional cases of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan
The Supreme Court clarified that it can grant divorce by mutual consent under Article 142 of the Constitution, including waiving the six-month waiting period and granting divorce on irretrievable breakdown grounds, while quashing connected proceedings to do complete justice.
Shilpa Shailesh v. Varun Srinivasan
The Supreme Court held that it can waive or reduce the six-month waiting period for divorce by mutual consent under Article 142, granting complete justice in matrimonial disputes even if one spouse does not consent.
Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan
The Supreme Court clarified the scope of its power under Article 142 to grant divorce by mutual consent dispensing with the statutory waiting period and to grant divorce on irretrievable breakdown of marriage, subject to judicial scrutiny and public policy.
DARCL Logistics Limited v. Essemm Logistics
The Supreme Court held that counter-claims for loss or damage to goods under the Carriage by Road Act, 2007 are not maintainable without prior written notice as mandated by Section 16, overruling the trial court’s decision.
ESSEMM LOGISTICS v. DARCL LOGISTICS LIMITED
The Supreme Court held that the mandatory notice under Section 16 of the Carriage by Road Act, 2007 applies only to claims for loss or damage to consignments and not to other types of claims, allowing the appellant's counter-claim to proceed.
DARCL Logistics Limited v. ESSEMM Logistics
The court held that counter-claims for loss or damage to goods under the Carriage by Road Act, 2007 are barred without prior written notice as mandated by Section 16, and such non-compliance warrants rejection under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
Jasbir Singh v. National Investigation Agency
The Supreme Court held that filing a charge-sheet within the statutory period under Section 167(2) CrPC, even without prior sanction under UAPA or Explosives Act, does not entitle accused to default bail.
Jasbir Singh v. National Investigation Agency
The Supreme Court held that filing a charge sheet within the statutory period suffices for default bail entitlement under Section 167(2) CrPC, and delay in sanction or approval under special laws like UAPA does not entitle accused to default bail.
Samra @ Jasbir Singh v. National Investigation Agency
The Supreme Court held that filing a chargesheet within the statutory period completes investigation for default bail purposes, and delayed sanction for prosecution under special laws does not entitle accused to default bail.