Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
IIFL Home Finance Ltd v. Punkaj Bhagchand Chhallani & Ors.
Delhi High Court dismissed petitions for appointment of arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act due to lack of territorial jurisdiction as the cause of action and respondents' residence were outside its jurisdiction.
Staff Selection Commission v. Deshbandhu
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the CAT order due to inordinate delay and laches, reaffirming that unexplained delay can bar judicial relief even in writ proceedings.
Aktiebolaget Volvo & Ors. v. Mantis Technologies Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunctions, awarded damages, and ordered domain name transfers against defendants infringing the well-known 'VOLVO' trademark, decreeing the suit ex-parte due to defendants' default.
RNR CAB SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. v. NHAI
The Delhi High Court curtailed a three-month debarment imposed on a bidder for an inadvertent tendering error and directed the authority to consider the bidder’s subsequent H-1 bid, emphasizing proportionality and bona fide disclosure.
Mohd. Nizam v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Anr.
The Delhi High Court directed authorities to regulate the unauthorized Saturday weekly market in New Ranjeet Nagar, balancing vendors' livelihood rights with residents' right to free movement, and ordered inquiry into illegal protection money collection.
Krishna Rani v. Sh Pradeep Kumar Pathak & Ors.
Revision under Section 115 CPC is not maintainable against interlocutory orders that do not finally dispose of the suit, and such petitions must be dismissed.
SHRI HASNAIN ALI @ CHAMAN v. MOHD TASLEEM ANSARI AND ORS
The High Court held that revision under Section 115 CPC is not maintainable against interlocutory orders that do not finally dispose of the suit, dismissing the petition accordingly.
Rieter AG and Anr. v. Kavassery Narayanaswamy Venkatasubramanian
The Delhi High Court held it has territorial jurisdiction over a suit for intellectual property infringement where the defendant participated in an exhibition near Delhi and delivered goods with invoice to Delhi, dismissing the defendant's challenge under Order VII Rule 10 CPC.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-1 v. Sneh Lata Sawhney
The Delhi High Court held that assessment orders passed beyond the limitation period cannot be saved by an invalid reference for information under the Indo-Swiss DTAA, as the amended treaty provisions effective from 01.04.2011 do not permit requests for prior periods, thus dismissing the Revenue's appeals.
Ram Vijay Raut v. Tara Chand & Anr
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and remanded the compensation claim for fresh assessment, holding that credible evidence can establish employer-employee relationship despite lack of formal documents under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923.
Randhawa Ultrasonography Imaging and Research Institute v. State of NCT, Delhi
The Delhi High Court held that FIR registration and police investigation under the PC&PNDT Act are not barred by Section 28, affirmed the jurisdiction of the West District Authority, and dismissed the petition seeking quashing of the FIR.
Devender Singh v. Dilip Kumar
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's refusal to reject a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, holding that the suit disclosed a prima facie cause of action requiring trial despite alleged knowledge of pending litigation and disputed payment terms.
Union of India v. M/S V.K. Sood Engineer & Contractors
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition to set aside the arbitral award, holding that jurisdictional objections raised late were waived and the award did not violate public policy or fundamental contractual principles.
A. S. Ismail v. National Investigation Agency
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appellant's interim bail application on medical grounds, holding that adequate treatment is being provided in custody and no exceptional circumstances warrant release.
Ajay Kumar v. Najendra Singh & Ors.
Delhi High Court partly allowed the motor accident claim appeal, directing enhanced compensation for future prospects, treatment, pain and suffering, and increased interest rate, while affirming other findings.
Mukul Rathore v. Virender Pratap Singh and Ors.
Delhi High Court partly allowed motor accident appeal enhancing compensation for amputation injury and remanding for reassessment of various heads including disability, attendant charges, and artificial limb cost.
The New India Assurance Company Limited v. Rajan & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld an ₹89.57 lakh motor accident compensation award, affirming that functional disability must be assessed based on impact on earning capacity and that attendant charges are compensable even without documentary proof.
Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Meenakshi Madan & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld the finding of negligence in a motor accident claim but remanded the case to adjust compensation for loss of future prospects and disallow double compensation for loss of love and affection.
Vishal Sehgal v. Rungta Irrigation Ltd
The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiff a one-time opportunity to examine an additional witness after closure of evidence in a commercial suit, balancing procedural fairness with the need for expeditious trial.
Delhi Transport Corporation v. M/S Atma Ram Properties (P). Ltd
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court's discretion to allow amendment of plaint to include prior eviction petition admissions relevant to the rent dispute under the Delhi Rent Control Act, dismissing the petition challenging the amendment.