Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd v. Indorbit Pharmaceuticals P. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that a decree under Order VIII Rule 10 CPC cannot be granted merely due to defendants' default without the plaintiff proving prior adoption and use of the trade dress, and thus refused to pass a decree without trial in a passing off and copyright infringement suit.
Mankind Pharma Limited v. Zhejiang Yige Enterprise Management Group Co. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal of Mankind Pharma, holding that the mark 'FLORASIS' is deceptively similar to the prior registered trademark 'FLORA' and directed removal of 'FLORASIS' from the trademark register.
Romil Gupta Trading as Sohan Lal Gupta v. Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.
The Delhi High Court set aside the cancellation of a trademark registration due to the Registrar's failure to give mandatory one month's notice and held that correcting a clerical error without substantial alteration is permissible under the Trade Marks Rules.
Anil Kumar and Ors. v. The State & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a 2013 FIR under Sections 328, 506, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement between parties, emphasizing the Court's power under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to end criminal proceedings where continuation would be unjust.
Sanjeev Kumar & Ors. v. State of NCT Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on a genuine and voluntary settlement between matrimonial parties, emphasizing the role of mediation and abuse of process doctrine.
Abid Ali Siddiqui v. State (Govt of NCT Delhi) and Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under section 498A IPC based on a genuine amicable settlement between the parties, holding that continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law.
Sh. Rakesh Kumar and Ors. v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC following a genuine settlement between estranged spouses, emphasizing the court's power to prevent abuse of process through amicable dispute resolution.
Rajeev Kumar and Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 34, and 406 IPC following a genuine and voluntary amicable settlement between the parties, emphasizing the Court's power to end criminal proceedings in the interest of justice.
Shamikh Shahbaz Shaikh v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The Delhi High Court dismissed anticipatory bail in a serious cyber fraud case, emphasizing the necessity of custodial interrogation and the distinct approach required for economic offences.
Gaurav Jajoria & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a matrimonial dispute FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 506, and 34 following a voluntary mutual settlement between the parties, promoting peace and avoiding futile litigation.
Hemant Bhardwaj & Ors. v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR based on an amicable settlement between the parties, emphasizing the court's power to prevent futile litigation and promote peace.
Ravi Kumar & Ors. v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406, 498A, and 34 following an amicable mediation settlement and mutual divorce, emphasizing the court's power to quash proceedings to promote harmony.
Naveen Juyal and Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406, 498A, and 34 IPC following an amicable mediation settlement and divorce between the parties, emphasizing the court's power to quash proceedings to promote peace.
Pardeep Garg & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 406, 498A, and 34 of the BNSS following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce between the parties, emphasizing the court's power to promote harmony through compromise in matrimonial disputes.
Sakshi Dhall v. Indira Dhall & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the maintainability of a simpliciter suit for partition by a co-owner presumed in joint possession and held that fixed court fee suffices absent pleaded ouster.
Jasleen Kaur v. Sarvjeet Singh
The High Court upheld the trial court's dismissal of the petitioner's application to reject the plaint in a malicious prosecution suit, holding that the plaint disclosed a cause of action and the suit was within limitation considering the Supreme Court's extension of limitation period during the COVID-19 pandemic.
M/S MKU Ltd v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11 stage, judicial scrutiny is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator to decide disputed issues including limitation and novation.
ANKUSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI v. JAMSHED ALAM & ORS.
The High Court upheld the setting aside of an ex-parte decree in a summary suit, directing the respondents to deposit Rs.15 lacs to contest the suit and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication on merits.
H AND M HENNES AND MAURITZ RETAIL PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1) NEW DELHI & ANR.
The Delhi High Court quashed a reassessment notice issued without mandatory prior approval under Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act, affirming that extended limitation under TOLA does not alter the specified authority for approval.
Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax)-1, New Delhi v. Goto Technologies Ireland Unlimited Company
The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT's ruling that subscription payments for cloud services by a non-resident are not taxable as royalty income under the India-Ireland DTAA and Income Tax Act.