402 Delhi High Court judgments explained in plain English: what was decided, the law applied and why it matters. Page 16 of 17.
Delhi High Court rules that possession without lawful title is unauthorized, and termination of tenancy extends to sub-lessees even without privity of contract.
Delhi High Court holds that Registrar of Firms lacks power to cancel partnership registration under IPA; only rectification of mistakes permitted under Section 64.
Delhi High Court clarifies that minor visual changes in device marks do not constitute substantial alteration under Rule 37 of Trade Marks Rules, 2017.
Delhi High Court upholds arbitral award, clarifying that Section 34 challenges cannot substitute court's interpretation for arbitrator's reasoned findings on contract and evidence.
Delhi High Court denies anticipatory bail to directors of contractor firm after death from unguarded excavation, holding contractual duties non-delegable and criminal liability intact despite insolvency.
Delhi High Court holds that senior officials cannot be compelled to appear personally in petty municipal nuisance cases where lower officers are already present and representation is available.
Delhi High Court grants bail where arrest memo fails to disclose grounds of arrest, affirming Article 22 rights as non-negotiable under BNSS and constitutional jurisprudence.
Delhi High Court holds that elderly accused with serious health conditions cannot be compelled to appear personally in Section 138 NI Act cases without due regard to medical evidence and alternative arrangements.
Delhi High Court holds that arbitral tribunals cannot grant relief dehors express contractual terms, reinforcing statutory limits under Section 28(3) of the Arbitration Act.
Delhi High Court holds that limitation for filing chargesheet under CrPC begins when police first learn of the offence, not upon FIR registration. Key ruling on Sections 468, 469 CrPC.
Delhi High Court holds that MSMED Act overrides private arbitration agreements; jurisdiction vests in Facilitation Council where supplier is located, not as per contract.
Delhi High Court holds that post-award interest under Section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration Act is statutory and cannot be excluded by contract, reinforcing party autonomy limits.
Delhi High Court holds that revocation petitions under Section 64 of the Patents Act remain maintainable even after patent expiry or after a Section 107 defence is raised.
Delhi High Court holds that consensual relationship breakup, without clear instigation, cannot constitute abetment of suicide under Section 108 BNS. Bail granted.
Delhi High Court holds that 3+2 year parking contracts require discretionary approval by Competent Authority; satisfactory performance alone does not entitle contractor to automatic extension.
Delhi High Court holds that non-compliance with CPC Order VI Rule 15A is curable and cannot defeat substantive rights when merits have been fully adjudicated.
Delhi High Court holds that railways are strictly liable for deaths arising from untoward incidents under Section 124-A, absent proof of statutory exceptions.
Delhi High Court holds that ex-servicemen availing age relaxation cannot claim migration to unreserved category, even with higher marks, if recruitment rules explicitly bar such migration.
Delhi High Court upholds framing of charges against petitioners despite co-accused being discharged, clarifying that parity does not apply where evidence establishes active proprietorship and intent.
Delhi High Court upholds SSC's answer key revisions in CGLE 2024, affirming judicial deference to subject matter experts absent patent illegality or arbitrariness.
Delhi High Court holds that arbitral tribunals may permit partial encashment of performance security based on established breaches, even without precise loss quantification, under Section 74 ICA.
Delhi High Court holds that CBSE cannot retrospectively withdraw Additional Subject eligibility for 2025 Class XII passouts who relied on longstanding policy.
Delhi High Court sets aside arbitral award for failing to explain denial of interest and costs, affirming that unreasoned awards conflict with public policy under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
Delhi High Court holds that a director who resigned before cheque issuance cannot be held liable under Section 141 NI Act unless formally recorded with ROC. Key precedent on procedural compliance.