Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
PVR INOX LTD. v. SHEETAL ANSAL & ANR.
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to resolve disputes between the petitioner and Respondent 1, leaving inclusion of Respondent 2 to the arbitrator's discretion.
Cadbury U K Limited v. Manoj Agarwal & Ors.
The Delhi High Court decreed a trademark and copyright infringement suit by consent based on a settlement agreement containing undertakings to cease infringing use and withdraw conflicting registrations, and ordered refund of court fees to the plaintiff.
M/S MEX SWITCHGEARS PVT. LTD. v. VIKRAM SURI TRADING AS M/S ARMEX AUTO INDUSTRIES
The Delhi High Court held that service of a counter statement by email without an email ID provided by the opponent does not constitute valid service under Section 143 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, and set aside the order deeming the opposition abandoned.
Nutan Warehousing Company Pvt. Ltd v. The Commissioner, Central Tax, Pune-II
The Bombay High Court held that warehousing services for tea that retains its essential agricultural characteristics after minimal processing are exempt from GST under Notification No. 12/2017, quashing the adverse Advance Ruling orders.
Electonica India Ltd. v. Electonica Hitech Machines Private Limited
The Bombay High Court set aside the Trade Marks Registry's non-speaking orders allowing trademark transmission without considering objections, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication under Section 45 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Prashant Rambhau Pathare; Dilip Rambhau Pathare; Sandip Rambhau Pathare v. Aparna Ashok Joshi; Amit Ashok Joshi; Anushri Kaustubh Joshi; Vasantraj Champalal Talsera; Goutam Champalal Talsera; Vimalraj Champalal Talsera
The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal against refusal of temporary injunction in a suit for specific performance due to lack of prima facie proof linking payment to the agreement and inconsistent pleadings by the plaintiffs.
Venus Vasant Valley Co-operative Housing Society Limited v. Sheth Developers Private Limited
The Bombay High Court allowed the developer to continue construction using disclosed FSI and TDR without flat purchasers' consent under Section 7A of MOFA, holding that full disclosure of development potential satisfies statutory requirements and phased development conditions conveyance rights.
Karam Bir v. All India Council for Technical Education
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging AICTE's remedial examination modalities, holding that adequate public notice was given, registration deadlines must be respected, and no legal basis existed to relax pass criteria or round off marks.
PVR INOX LTD. v. SHEETAL ANSAL & ORS.
The Delhi High Court referred disputes between the petitioner and respondents 1 and 3 to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, leaving the inclusion of respondent 2 to the arbitrator's determination.
Smt. Saranga Anil Kumar Aggarwal v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking enhanced development rights under new regulations without scheme conversion, holding that statutory conditions and prevailing regulations govern entitlement.
Neeraj Kumar Uttam v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court directed the CRPF to decide the petitioner's application for withdrawal of resignation under Rule 26(4) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, emphasizing that tentative file notings do not constitute binding acceptance.
Anupam Dikshit v. S. Kumars Nationwide Limited & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that suits instituted prior to liquidation can continue in Civil Court with the Official Liquidator impleaded as party, as Section 33(5) of the IBC bars only fresh suits after liquidation and does not oust Civil Court jurisdiction over pending suits.
M/S AXALTA COATING SYSTEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. v. M/S PANDIT AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.
The Delhi High Court directed reference of disputes under a Supply Agreement to arbitration and appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, with the respondent's consent.
Bhartiya Kala Prasarini Sabha v. Rajendra Pandharinath Dhavale
The High Court upheld the illegality of a promotion violating reservation roster rules but modified the relief to restrict retrospective promotion and backwages, directing reconsideration by the promotion committee.
2d77262a3a33c735c260eebc4345b6764de9c7b601db8aac102956ae76177735
The court upheld the validity of summons issued under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, dismissing the appellants' challenge based on procedural defects and affirming the trial court's jurisdiction.
GOVT OF NCT DELHI AND ORS. v. SURENDRA SINGH
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing payment of interest on delayed retiral benefits and interest on that interest, ruling that the Interest Act's prohibition on interest on interest does not apply to such administrative tribunal orders.
Anil Govind Ganu v. Innovative Technomics Pvt. Ltd.
The Bombay High Court held that founder directors with ultimate control over the company are not employees entitled to gratuity beyond statutory limits absent an express agreement, and balance sheet entries alone do not create such liability.
Ajay Deep Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Anr.
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator on behalf of the respondent under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act due to failure to nominate an arbitrator, directing arbitration to proceed under SAROD rules.
Ajay Deep Construction Pvt Ltd v. Union of India and Anr.
The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator on behalf of the respondent under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act after the respondent failed to nominate one, directing arbitration to proceed under SAROD rules.
Dangkwang Precision India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dangkwang Precision Employees Union
The Bombay High Court upheld the Industrial Tribunal's wage revision Award, affirming the need for substantiated financial assessment including legitimate depreciation and proper industry comparison in wage disputes.