Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Dinesh Singh v. The Central Bureau of Investigation
The Bombay High Court dismissed the revision challenging the rejection of discharge of a former Custodian of Enemy Property accused of conspiracy and corruption in withdrawing statutory notices and facilitating alienation of enemy property.
Modi-Mundipharma Pvt. Limited v. Speciality Meditech Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant's registered trademarks were descriptive or unused standalone marks, and the respondents' use of FEMICONTIN was bona fide and not infringing or passing off.
Hindalco Industries Limited v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court held that delay in filing an application under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act should be condoned liberally to advance substantial justice and that the Commissioner’s wide powers under Section 264 are not restricted by the nature of an order under Section 143(1).
Delhi International Airport Limited v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that lease termination under the 2002 lease deed takes effect only after the 12-month notice period with due compliance, and contractual disputes without statutory basis are not ordinarily amenable to writ jurisdiction, dismissing DIAL's challenge to MoCA and AAI's decisions permitting HCI to retain possession.
Indo Count Industries Ltd. v. Shankar Mahadev Takmare & Ors.
The High Court held that an agreement fixing retirement age at 58 years is valid under MIR Act and set aside interim orders extending employment till 60 years.
Louis Lobo v. Mohamed Yusuf Moosa & Ors.
The High Court upheld eviction on unauthorized subletting grounds where the tenant admitted tenancy and continuous exclusive occupation by third parties was established, rejecting the claim that tenancy was created for a club.
Airports Authority of India v. Delhi International Airport Ltd.; Airports Authority of India v. Mumbai International Airport Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral award interpreting the OMDA's definition of "Revenue" to exclude capital costs and other specified deductions, directing refund of excess Annual Fee paid by airport JVCs to AAI with interest.
Ghanshyam Malhotra & Ors. v. Vithalnagar Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd.
The Court held that an Administrator's lease termination notice issued beyond his tenure is invalid, lease termination is a policy decision reserved for the elected Managing Committee, and an unauthorized assignment deed is illegal.
Central Railway-Mumbai Division v. A-1 Laundry Services (JV)
The High Court set aside the arbitral award's reduction of lost linen recovery rate below contractual terms, upheld penalty caps, and affirmed fixed cost compensation during COVID-19, emphasizing strict adherence to contract terms by arbitral tribunals.
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited v. G. R. Engineering Private Limited
The Bombay High Court partially set aside an arbitral award denying liquidated damages for lack of reasoning while upholding other claims relating to civil works, insurance, service tax, and customs duty in a commercial arbitration between HPCL and GRE.
Reliance Integrated Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Satyananda Mohanty
The Bombay High Court held that a separation request via E-Portal constitutes resignation but without valid acceptance by the employer, reinstatement is not warranted and compensation is appropriate.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8 v. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's decision that royalty payments made by Samsung India Electronics to its parent for technological know-how were at arm's length and not subject to transfer pricing adjustments, rejecting the Revenue's claim that the payments were to itself as a contract manufacturer.
M/s. Chalet Hotels Ltd. v. Bhikan Laxman Deokar
The Bombay High Court affirmed employer-employee relationship between a hotel and a driver engaged through contractors, held his termination illegal, and awarded lump sum compensation in lieu of reinstatement and backwages.
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation v. Prakash Vasant Hardikar
The High Court held that the Respondent's dismissal for selling already sold tickets was justified but rendered ineffective due to reinstatement, denying backwages for the dismissal period while directing release of retirement benefits with interest.
Jayashree Anil Satheye v. Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India Ltd.
The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition challenging pay fixation under the Revised Pay Rules, holding that bunching increments apply only when pay fixation results in pay bunching at the minimum pay band, which was not the case for the petitioner.
Atos India Private Limited v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that providing manpower services for software maintenance and bug fixing without transfer of intellectual property rights is a contract of service and not sale liable to VAT under the MVAT Act.
Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State v. M/s. Wockhardt Ltd.
The Bombay High Court held that the Revenue failed to discharge the burden of proof to classify the product as a plant growth promoter, upholding the Tribunal's finding that it is a fertiliser taxable at a lower rate.
Rani Singh v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the dismissal of a police officer absconding after criminal charges, ruling that family pension is not payable despite presumed death after seven years, as dismissal without enquiry was valid and pension rights forfeited.
KTM-AG v. Honda Motorcycles and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.
The Delhi High Court disposed of the trademark dispute petition as settled and directed cancellation of the "DUKE" trademark registration in accordance with the parties' Settlement Agreement.
Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Mahendra Shah
The High Court held that the Special Court has discretion to reduce interest on SEBI penalty amounts under Section 24A, applying 6% interest pre-2013 and 12% post-2013, and that SEBI's consent is not mandatory for compounding offences.