Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
MEP Infrastructure Developers Ltd v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ appeal, holding that contractual disputes with State instrumentalities must be resolved through contract mechanisms or civil courts, and writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is not available absent arbitrariness or violation of natural justice.
Union of India v. Shri Ram Krishna Paramhansshiksha Parishad & Anr
The Delhi High Court held that the deeming provision under Section 13A(6) of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act does not apply to deficient applications rejected within the statutory period, thereby upholding the rejection of a sub-standard Ayurveda college's establishment application.
Ashok Biswas S O Anil Biswas and Anr v. The Divisional Commissioner Department of Revenue Govt of NCT Delhi and Ors
The Delhi High Court upheld eviction of appellants from their elderly parents' property under the Senior Citizens Act, emphasizing statutory protections against ill-treatment and the primacy of due process over interim injunctions.
Purshottam @ Bhalu & Anr. v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR arising from a neighbourly dispute after the parties amicably settled, holding that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. permit quashing where continuation of trial is unnecessary and oppressive.
M/S C Gopal Reddy and Company v. National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd & Anr
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking interim stay of contract termination by NHIDCL, holding that injunctions against termination of determinable contracts in public infrastructure projects are impermissible under law.
Shri Bhagwan v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court directed the Director General, CISF to decide the petitioner’s pending Revision Petition within four weeks, disposing of the writ petition without quashing the impugned order or restoring the petitioner’s posting.
Sh. Surjeet Singh v. Dominant Systems Pvt. Limited
The Delhi High Court held that under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, a worker not gainfully employed during pendency of proceedings is entitled to full wages, and mere assistance in family business without proof of remuneration does not defeat this right.
Shridhar Bajaj v. Gyanesh Chaudhary
The Delhi High Court dismissed the suit for specific performance of an Agreement to Sell, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove continuous readiness and willingness, time was the essence of the contract, and the Agreement was rightly cancelled upon non-fulfillment of a condition precedent.
GLAXOSMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. v. HORIZON BIOCEUTICALS PVT. LTD & ANR.
The Delhi High Court granted an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant from using the mark COMODEX, holding it infringed the plaintiff's registered trademark COBADEX due to likelihood of confusion in pharmaceutical products.
Manish Mohan v. I.O. Narcotics Control Bureau
The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner in an NDPS case, holding that statements under section 67 NDPS Act and confessions to NCB officers are inadmissible against him and that the prosecution failed to prima facie connect him to the offence.
Dr. Yogender Kumar Puri v. NCT Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR and all proceedings under Sections 279, 323, 354, and 34 IPC based on a full and voluntary settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland Unlimited Company & Ors. v. Metrochem API Private Limited
The Delhi High Court decreed a patent infringement suit in terms of a court-mediated settlement where the defendant acknowledged patent validity, ceased infringing activities, and the parties agreed to binding terms including token costs and waiver of damages.
Monish Baweja v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court remanded the petitioner's claim for alternative allotment of a plot for fresh consideration after finding that the rejection was based on incorrect ownership information.
Mumtaz Ara v. Gauhar Hussain & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that a litigant declared indigent by an unchallenged order cannot be directed to pay court fees on a review application absent fresh material altering that status.
Saurabh Sabharwal v. Satish Bhatia
The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court’s order closing the petitioner’s opportunity to record evidence due to repeated delays and non-compliance, dismissing the petition with costs.
MS. Yashtee (Minor) & Anr. v. Govt of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court directed the Government of NCT of Delhi to consider and dispose of the petitioners' representations for admission under the EWS/Disadvantage Group category within two weeks, upholding prior Court directions.
M/S B G SLEEPER WORKS v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging disqualification from a government tender reverse auction due to invalid Udyam registration, affirming strict compliance with MSME registration requirements under procurement policy.
PUMA SE v. BRIJENDRA SINGH TRADING AS SASTAJOOTA
The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and costs to Puma SE against a defendant selling counterfeit PUMA products, holding that identical use of registered marks on identical goods presumes infringement under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
National Capital Territory of Delhi v. Subhash Chander Khatri
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession has been taken, even if compensation has not been paid, and set aside the High Court's order declaring lapse and awarding compensation.
Pramod Singla v. Union of India
The Supreme Court held that under COFEPOSA, the detaining authority must consider representations promptly while the Central Government must await the Advisory Board's report, and quashed the detention order due to illegible grounds of detention supplied to the appellant.