Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Tushar Bansal & Anr. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under sexual harassment and related IPC sections based on an amicable settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.
Ramakrishna Teletronics Pvt Ltd v. Top Victory Investments Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging an arbitral award, holding that the appellant failed to prove a valid settlement and that the court's interference with the arbitral award was unwarranted.
Neelesh Kumar Singh & Ors. v. The State Govt of NCT & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between estranged spouses, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.
Om Prakash v. Brahm Singh
The High Court upheld the trial court’s dismissal of an amendment application filed after trial commencement, holding that due diligence must be shown under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to permit such amendments.
Ansal Housing Limited v. Vikas Jain
The Delhi High Court set aside an unreasoned NCDRC order modifying a consumer dispute decision without hearing the petitioner, remanding the matter for a fresh, reasoned hearing.
Col Ajay Ahlawat & Anr. v. Sudhir Kumar Windlass
The Delhi High Court set aside the trial court's order denying a co-defendant permission to lead evidence despite an unsigned Written Statement, allowing examination of one witness and directing expeditious disposal of the suit.
Ajay & Anr. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC based on an amicable settlement between estranged spouses, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process.
Gaurav Jain v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr
The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process in matrimonial disputes.
MSA Global LLC Oman v. Engineering Projects India Ltd
Delhi High Court holds that the arbitration seat is India, Indian courts have jurisdiction, and grants injunction restraining arbitration continuation due to arbitrator's non-disclosure and potential bias.
State v. Garibullah
The High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in a motor accident case, holding that mere high speed without evidence of rash or negligent driving is insufficient for conviction under Sections 279 and 304A IPC.
Management/Chairman Balvantray Mehta Vidya Bhawan Senior Secondary School v. Anil Kumar Aggarwal
The Delhi High Court held that Section 8(2) of the Delhi School Education Act does not apply to voluntary retirement under Rule 48-A of the CCS Rules, quashing the Tribunal’s order reinstating the employee.
Tarun Aggarwal v. Union of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the tender award due to disputed factual issues and lack of demonstrated prejudice from procedural lapses, holding such matters require trial in a civil court.
State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) v. Hamid
The Delhi High Court upheld the acquittal of a husband charged under Section 306 IPC, ruling that mere extramarital affair without direct instigation or cruelty does not constitute abetment of suicide.
Dr. Saroj Bahl v. Sushma Batra
The Delhi High Court dismissed the defendant's application to reject the plaint, holding that a non-executant alleging forgery may seek declaratory relief with consequential injunctions, and such issues as limitation and personal interest require trial.
Sithara N.S. & Ors. v. Sai Ram General Insurance Company Limited
The Supreme Court dismissed appeals against dismissal of motor accident claims, holding that the claimants failed to prove the involvement of the offending vehicle and rash and negligent driving on the preponderance of probabilities.
Director of Town Panchayat v. M. Jayabal
The Supreme Court held that compassionate appointment is a concession, not a right, and once accepted on a post, no claim to a higher post arises later, dismissing delayed claims for promotion on compassionate grounds.
Federal Express Corporation v. Fedex Securities Private Ltd. & Ors.
The Bombay High Court granted interim injunction restraining defendants from using the mark FEDEX, holding that their use infringed the plaintiff's registered and well-known trademark despite defendants' reliance on Section 159(5) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Deputy Collector v. M/s. Vasinaka Sahakari Mandal
The Bombay High Court held that the Reference Court under the Land Acquisition Act has jurisdiction to determine the relevant notification date for compensation calculation, rejecting the acquiring body's preliminary objection.
M/s. Ramnarain Sons Pvt Ltd v. The Board of Mumbai Port Authority
The Bombay High Court held that eviction suits instituted before appointment of the Estate Officer under the PPE Act retain jurisdiction in the original court despite subsequent transfers, dismissing the petition challenging Small Causes Court jurisdiction.
Shri Pundlik Dagu Holgade & Ors. v. Shri Pandurang Kashinath Hire & Ors.
The court held that a clear sale deed with a condition to repurchase, lacking debtor-creditor relationship, is not a mortgage by conditional sale, and the right to repurchase extinguished after the stipulated period.