Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Sonidave v. Yasin Mir
Contempt proceedings are not maintainable for enforcement of a decree passed in a first appeal; execution proceedings under the Code of Civil Procedure are the appropriate remedy.
Ajit Kumar v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners in a cheating and conspiracy case after settlement with the complainant and payment of compensation.
Dinesh v. State; Bimla Devi v. State
Anticipatory bail granted to accused under Sections 498A/328/34 IPC on condition of monetary payment to complainant and cooperation with investigation.
Sushila Devi v. State
The Delhi High Court granted bail to petitioners accused of illegal occupation of land based on disputed ownership documents, holding that custodial interrogation was unnecessary given the documentary nature of the case.
Sh. Mangal Sain Sharma v. State Bank of India and Ors.
The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner is entitled to pension at the higher pre-amendment rate subject to the revised ceiling, allowing his writ petition for pension re-computation and arrears.
Anadil Hasan v. State
The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail application of the petitioner accused of kidnapping for ransom and murder, holding that no prima facie case for bail was made out given the gravity of the offences and the petitioner’s role as main conspirator.
Central Cottage Industries Corporation of India Ltd. v. M Tex Exports Pvt Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed CCIC's petition under Section 34 challenging an arbitral award, holding that unsubstantiated claims of loss without evidence do not warrant setting aside the award.
Bindu Sharma v. State
Delhi High Court set aside the murder conviction of Bindu Sharma due to lack of reliable evidence and inconsistencies in the key child witness's testimony.
Atul Talwar v. State
The Delhi High Court quashed FIR and charges for criminal intimidation and extortion where a harmless toy pistol was used, holding no reasonable person would feel intimidated.
Monshar Ent. v. IAAI and Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that the limitation period for filing objections to an arbitral award begins only upon specific service of notice under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, and set aside an order making the award a Rule of the Court due to non-service of such notice.
Atul Talwar v. State
The Delhi High Court quashed FIR and charges for criminal intimidation where the accused pointed a harmless toy pistol, holding no reasonable person would feel intimidated under such circumstances.
Saisudhir Energy Limited v. NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Limited
The Delhi High Court set aside arbitral damages awarded without proof of loss, holding liquidated damages must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss and government agencies must act fairly under public mission contracts.
Saisudhir Energy Limited v. NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Limited
The Delhi High Court upheld the arbitral finding that liquidated damages cannot be awarded without proof of loss, setting aside damages granted contrary to the fundamental policy of Indian law in a solar power project dispute.
Sanjeev Desai v. State NCT of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and directed probate of a Will despite signature discrepancies and post-death notarization, emphasizing the need to examine attesting witnesses and consider the original Will as primary evidence.
Sukhdev Singh v. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
The High Court allowed the petition challenging the recall of prosecution witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. due to delay and availability of documents on record, emphasizing promptness and necessity in recalling witnesses.
Hero Cycles Ltd v. Naveen
The Delhi High Court disposed of a trademark infringement suit by consent based on the defendant's undertaking not to infringe the plaintiff's registered trademark 'HERO' in the future.
Prabhat Sanitaryware Pvt Ltd v. Century Sanitaryware Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court decreed a trademark infringement suit based on a joint compromise application and granted a 50% refund of court fees under Section 16A of the Court Fees Act.
ENEROIL OFFSHORE DRILLING LTD v. CENTEK LIMITED
The Delhi High Court accepted the parties' joint settlement under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC and disposed of the patent infringement suit accordingly.
IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD & ANR v. M/S DYNAMIC MOVERS PVT LTD
The court dismissed the application to keep the execution petition in abeyance after the related application to set aside the ex parte decree was withdrawn and directed transfer of execution proceedings to the court having territorial jurisdiction over the Judgment Debtor's assets.
Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd v. Seema & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the motor accident compensation award including future prospects and loss of love and affection, dismissing the insurer's appeal.