Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Appa Bhagwan Patil v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court quashed the conviction for robbery under Section 392 IPC due to insufficient and contradictory prosecution evidence, emphasizing the necessity of proving all essential ingredients beyond reasonable doubt.
P.R. Naik and M.J. Brahmabhatt v. The State of Maharashtra
The High Court quashed convictions under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act due to fatal procedural lapses, undue delay in sample analysis, and improper storage, emphasizing strict adherence to statutory timelines and safeguards.
Sambhaji Uttam Suryavanshi v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence of a father for repeatedly sexually assaulting his two-and-a-half-year-old daughter, affirming the sufficiency of medical and testimonial evidence under the POCSO Act.
Lalit Shyam Tekchandani v. State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that failure to communicate grounds of arrest in writing, even when arrest is effected pursuant to Production Warrants under Section 267 Cr.P.C., renders the arrest and remand orders illegal, violating Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution.
Barla Hemanth Kumar v. Union of India and Anr
The Delhi High Court held that routine annual medical fitness does not guarantee qualification for promotion through LDCE, upholding the Review Medical Board's decision declaring the petitioner medically unfit.
Gedela Chandra Sekhara Rao v. Union of India and Anr
The Delhi High Court upheld the disqualification of a departmental candidate for having tattoos on prohibited areas, holding that compliance with medical standards in LDCE appointments is mandatory and no relief for tattoo removal is warranted.
Krishan v. M/S Oriental Ins Co Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that deceased passengers accompanying their own goods for a religious purpose were not gratuitous passengers, thereby denying the Insurance Company's recovery rights against the vehicle owner for compensation paid under the Motor Vehicles Act.
New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Sunil & Ors.
The Delhi High Court upheld enhanced compensation under amended Section 163-A Motor Vehicles Act for a fatal accident predating the Notification, applying the beneficial amendment to all pending claims.
Marriott Worldwide Corporation v. Hotel Marriot Prime & Anr.
The Delhi High Court granted summary judgment in favor of Marriott Worldwide Corporation, declaring 'MARRIOTT' a well-known trademark and restraining defendants from infringing it, awarding damages for deliberate trademark infringement and passing off.
Boston Ivy Healthcare Solutions Private Limited v. M/S Accord Medical Products Private Limited
The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction to the plaintiff against the defendant for trademark infringement and passing off of the mark "Medikabazaar" by the deceptively similar "Medicalbazzar" in the medical e-commerce sector.
CANDICO (I) LIMITED v. T.R. KOHLI, TRADING AS T.R. KOHLI AND SONS AND ANR.
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and directed registration of the trademark “JUMBO GUMBO” after holding that the opponent’s trademark application was abandoned and opposition under Section 11 could not be sustained.
PUMA SE v. Surender Singh and Anr.
The Delhi High Court allowed Puma SE's petition to cancel the deceptively similar trademark 'P11MA' registered by respondent no.1, holding it violated Sections 9 and 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Harkesh Sharma v. National Insurance Co. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal against dismissal of a motor accident claim, holding that delay in FIR registration and absence of damage to the offending vehicle do not conclusively disprove the accident or negligence.
Subodh Kumar v. Sanjay Kumar & Ors.
The Delhi High Court enhanced compensation for a motor accident victim by recalculating permanent disability, awarding loss of marriage prospects, increasing loss of amenities, and raising interest rate from 7.5% to 9% per annum.
Lalli Devi & Ors. v. Shriram Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. & Ors.
The Delhi High Court allowed the motor accident claim appeal, holding that chargesheet filing and eyewitness testimony suffice to establish negligence for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Ms. Hemlata Rawat and Ms. Easha v. Standard Farms Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that immunity under Section 245H(1) of the Income Tax Act requires explicit recording of satisfaction on full and true disclosure and cooperation, and dismissed review petitions upholding remand for fresh consideration.
Indo Engineering Project Corporation v. National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking interim relief against contract termination and fresh bidding notice due to the Petitioner's delay and held that the validity of termination is to be decided by arbitration.
Pfizer Inc. & Ors. v. Everest Pharmaceuticals Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court decreed patent infringement against defendants for unauthorized manufacture and sale of a generic version of plaintiffs' patented drug during patent validity, granting relief despite patent expiry during litigation.
RANANJAY PRATAP SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that service matters falling under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 must be agitated before the Central Administrative Tribunal, not the High Court, reaffirming the Supreme Court's ruling in L. Chandra Kumar.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - Central -1 v. Capital Power Systems Ltd.
The Delhi High Court held that reassessment under Section 150 of the Income Tax Act cannot be initiated without a clear finding or direction by appellate authorities that undisclosed income belongs to the assessee, dismissing Revenue's appeal to tax ₹7 crores in Capital Power Systems Ltd.'s hands.