Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Leonard Holding & Trading Pvt. Ltd. v. Satish Dhirajlal Vithlani
The Bombay High Court held that re-examination of a witness cannot be conducted by filing an affidavit in-lieu and must be conducted orally by the Court or a Commissioner as mandated under Order 18 Rule 4 CPC.
Mahesh Ramdas Jejurkar v. The Union of India & Ors.
The Bombay High Court quashed a COFEPOSA detention order for failing to specify the precise statutory ground of detention, holding that such ambiguity vitiates the subjective satisfaction and violates procedural safeguards under the Constitution.
Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. v. USV Private Limited
The Bombay High Court held that the respondent's activity constituted manufacturing, not unauthorized use of electricity, and upheld the levy of industrial tariff under the Electricity Act, 2003.
Dabur India Limited v. Ashok Kumar and Ors.
The Delhi High Court directs domain name registrars to block infringing domain names and recognizes RBI's beneficiary name lookup facility as a key enforcement tool in trademark infringement disputes involving domain names.
NORTH EASTERN CARRYING CORPORATION LTD v. DO BEST INFOWAY
The Delhi High Court upheld the mandatory 120-day limit for filing written statements in commercial suits and counter-claims, dismissing the petition seeking condonation of a one-day delay.
NORTH EASTERN CARRYING CORPORATION LTD v. GOYAL IMPEX AND INDUSTRIES LTD
The Delhi High Court upheld the mandatory 120-day limit for filing written statements in commercial suits and counter-claims, dismissing the petition seeking condonation of a one-day delay.
NORTH EASTERN CARRYING CORPORATION LTD v. HLG TRADING
The Delhi High Court upheld the mandatory 120-day limit for filing written statements in commercial suits and counter-claims, dismissing the petition seeking condonation of a one-day delay.
Rakesh Kumar Gupta v. Supreme Court of India
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging judicial appointment delays and upheld limited judicial review over the collegium's subjective satisfaction in appointments.
Anurag Mahajan v. Tumlare Travels Private Limited
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal seeking to set aside an ex parte decree due to unexplained delay and lack of sufficient cause, affirming the dismissal of applications under Order IX Rule 13 CPC and Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Navneet Sharma & Ors. v. The State (Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi) & Anr.
The Delhi High Court quashed a dowry harassment FIR under Section 482 CrPC following an amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce, holding that continuing proceedings would be an abuse of court process.
Mukesh Udeshi v. Jindal Steel Power Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that only parties to an arbitration agreement or proceedings under INDRP can challenge an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, dismissing a beneficial owner's petition for lack of locus standi.
KG Marketing India v. Rashi Santosh Soni & Anr.
The Court held that fabrication of newspaper advertisements to obtain ex-parte injunction constitutes a serious offence warranting Court-initiated proceedings under Section 340 CrPC and vacated the injunction granted to KG Marketing.
Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited v. Sreedevi Digital Systems Private Limited & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed contempt petitions alleging disruption of TV9 Telugu telecast, directing the dispute to be adjudicated by the TDSAT as the competent authority.
Speedacc Learning Systems Pvt Ltd & Anr. v. Satyasai Panigrahy
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking quashing of a complaint under Section 138 NI Act, holding that a director and authorized signatory is prima facie liable under Section 141 and disputed facts cannot be adjudicated at the pre-trial stage.
Sanyam Bhushan v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.
The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking quashing of complaints under Section 138 NI Act on grounds of delay and laches, holding disputed factual issues must be decided by the trial court and resignation from directorship does not absolve liability.
Jitin Mittal & Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Section 202 Cr.P.C. does not apply to applications under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act as these are civil proceedings, and the complaint cannot be quashed at the initial stage for lack of inquiry or jurisdiction.
M/S Books Cybertech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Satyasai Panigrahy
The Delhi High Court held that service of notice under Section 138 of the NI Act on the director who signed the cheque constitutes valid notice to the drawer company, and dismissed petitions seeking quashing of complaints on defective notice grounds.
SVC Cooperative Bank Ltd v. Trinity Touch Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court held that unilateral renewal of credit facilities without borrower’s acceptance does not attract prepayment penalty or processing fees, dismissing the bank’s appeal and ordering refund with interest.
Court on its Own Motion v. State of NCT of Delhi
In POCSO cases, the victim's age determined by bone age ossification test must be taken as the upper limit of the estimated range with a two-year margin of error applied, ensuring the benefit of doubt goes to the accused.
Saher Ali v. Delhi Development Authority
The Delhi High Court held that slum dwellers illegally occupying Yamuna floodplain lands not notified as JJ Clusters and lacking possession prior to 2006 are not entitled to rehabilitation, affirming the State's duty to remove encroachments to protect the environment.