Delhi Court February 2026 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Terix Computer Service India Pvt Ltd vs M/S Tpm Guru Private Ltd & Ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Judgment delivered on: 28/02/2026 + CS(COMM) 783/2025 TERIX COMPUTER SERVICE INDIA PVT LTD .....PlaintiffVersusM/S TPM GURU PRIVATE LTD & ORS. .....Defendants Advocates who appeared in this case For the Plaintiff : Mr. Prashant Mehra and Ms. Paridhi Chhibber, Advocates. For the Defendants : Mr. Vyom Raghuvanshi, Ms. Akanksha Rathore and Mr. Nitin Bhardwaj, Advocates for D1, 2, 3, 7, 8 & 9.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAJUDGMENTTEJAS KARIA, J I.A. 27016/20251. Defendant Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 and 9 (Defendants) have filed thepresent Application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) to dismiss the Suit and refer the dispute in the Suit to arbitration and appoint a Sole Arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes that have arisen between the Parties. Signature Not Verified CS(COMM) 783/2025 Page 1 of 31 CONTROVERSY IN THE SUIT:2. The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of providing hardware andsof...
International Business Machines Corporation vs Tivoli Gardens & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Judgment delivered on: 28/02/2026 + C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 45/2025 & IA Nos.19415/2025 & 26937/2025 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION .....AppellantVersusTIVOLI GARDENS & ANR. .....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case For the Appellant : Mr. Peeyoosh Kalra, Mr. C.A. Brijesh & Ms. Simranjot Kaur, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. Rishi Bansal & Mr. Indraneil Choudhary, Advocates for R-1. Ms. Nidhi Raman, Mr. Om Ram & Mr. Arnav Mittal, Advocates for R-2.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAJUDGMENTTEJAS KARIA, J1. The present Appeal has been filed under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (Act) assailing the order dated 23.04.2025 (Impugned Order) passed by the learned Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks, New Delhi. Signature Not Verified C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 45/2025 Page 1 of 24 FACTUAL BACKGROUND:2. The Appellant is a cloud platform and cognitive solutions companyoperating in over 170 coun...
Innovative Derma Care vs Vardhaman Skincare Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Judgment delivered on: 28/02/2026 + CM(M)-IPD 47/2025 INNOVATIVE DERMA CARE .....PetitionerversusVARDHAMAN SKINCARE PVT LTD & ANR. .....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case For the Petitioner : Ms. Aastha Sharma, Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh & Ms. Jahanvi Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondent : Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Mr. Shravan Kumar Bansal, Mr. Rishi Bansal & Mr. Risabh Gupta, Advocates for Respondent No. 2.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAJUDGMENTTEJAS KARIA, J1. The present Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 seeking setting aside of the order dated 21.11.2025CM(M)-IPD 47/2025 Page 1 of 13 (Impugned Order) passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial), West District, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi (Trial Court) in CS(COMM) No. 403/2019 (Suit) titled as Innovative Derma Care v. Vardhaman Skin Care Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., whereby the learned Trial Court dismissed an appl...
Ram Dayal vs M/S Kiran Engineering and Suppliers and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHIReserved on: 28.11.2025Pronounced on: 28.02.2026+ W.P.(C) 7711/2017 & CM APPL. 25495/2023 RAM DAYAL .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ritu Jain & Ms. Sreedhi Nair, Advs.versusM/S KIRAN ENGINEERING AND SUPPLIERS AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. A.K. Jain, Mrs. Santosh Jain & Mr. R.M. Tiwari, Advs.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGARJUDGMENT1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India assailing the Award dated 03.09.2013 (hereinafter referred to as impugned award) passed by learned Presiding Officer, Court No. IX, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Labour Court) in Industrial Dispute being ID No. 140/2012, whereby, the reference of the petitioner workman was dismissed.2. The facts necessary for deciding the controversy involved in the W.P.(C) 7711/2017 Page 1 of 21present writ petition is in narrow compass. It is stated that Sh. Ram Dayal (hereinafter referre...
Ugrakant Jha vs M/S Kiran Engineering and Suppliers and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHIReserved on: 28.11.2025Pronounced on:28.02.2026+ W.P.(C) 7697/2017 UGRAKANT JHA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ritu Jain & Ms. Sreedhi Nair, Advs.versusM/S KIRAN ENGINEERING AND SUPPLIERS AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. A.K. Jain, Mrs. Santosh Jain & Mr. R.M. Tiwari, Advs.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGARJUDGMENT1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India assailing the Award dated 03.09.2013 (hereinafter referred to as impugned award) passed by learned Presiding Officer, Court No. IX, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Labour Court) in Industrial Dispute being ID No. 192/2012, whereby, the reference of the petitioner workman was dismissed.2. The facts necessary for deciding the controversy involved in the present writ petition is in narrow compass. It is stated that Sh. W.P.(C) 7697/2017 Page 1 of 20Ugrakant Jha (hereinafter referred to as the petitione...
Ram Briksh vs M/S Kiran Engineering and Suppliers and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHIReserved on: 28.11.2025Pronounced on:28.02.2026+ W.P.(C) 7712/2017 RAM BRIKSH .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ritu Jain & Ms. Sreedhi Nair, Advs.versusM/S KIRAN ENGINEERING AND SUPPLIERS AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. A.K. Jain, Mrs. Santosh Jain & Mr. R.M. Tiwari, Advs.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGARJUDGMENT1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India assailing the Award dated 30.08.2013 (hereinafter referred to as impugned award) passed by learned Presiding Officer, Court No. IX, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Labour Court) in Industrial Dispute being ID No. 193/2012, whereby, the reference of the petitioner workman was dismissed.2. The facts necessary for deciding the controversy involved in the present writ petition is in narrow compass. It is stated that Sh. Ram W.P.(C) 7712/2017 Page 1 of 21Briksh (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner wo...
Ram Prakash vs M/S Kiran Engineering and Suppliers and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHIReserved on: 28.11.2025Pronounced on:28.02.2026+ W.P.(C) 7694/2017 RAM PRAKASH .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ritu Jain & Ms. Sreedhi Nair, Advs.versusM/S KIRAN ENGINEERING AND SUPPLIERS AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. A.K. Jain, Mrs. Santosh Jain & Mr. R.M. Tiwari, Advs.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGARJUDGMENT1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India assailing the Award dated 29.08.2013 (hereinafter referred to as impugned award) passed by learned Presiding Officer, Court No. IX, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Labour Court) in Industrial Dispute being ID No. 147/2012, whereby, the reference of the petitioner workman was dismissed.2. The facts necessary for deciding the controversy involved in the present writ petition is in narrow compass. It is stated that Sh. Ram W.P.(C) 7694/2017 Page 1 of 22Prakash (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner ...
Chinta Lal vs M/S Kiran Engineering and Suppliers and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHIReserved on: 28.11.2025Pronounced on:28.02.2026+ W.P.(C) 7710/2017 & CM APPL. 32948/2023 CHINTA LAL .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ritu Jain & Ms. Sreedhi Nair, Advs.versusM/S KIRAN ENGINEERING AND SUPPLIERS AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. A.K. Jain, Mrs. Santosh Jain & Mr. R.M. Tiwari, Advs.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGARJUDGMENT1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India assailing the Award dated 30.08.2013 (hereinafter referred to as impugned award) passed by learned Presiding Officer, Court No. IX, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Labour Court) in Industrial Dispute being ID No. 191/2012, whereby, the reference of the petitioner workman was dismissed.2. The facts necessary for deciding the controversy involved in the present writ petition is in narrow compass. It is stated that Sh. Chinta W.P.(C) 7710/2017 Page 1 of 22Ram (hereinafter referr...
Saiyeed Mohd Jafar vs M/S Kiran Engineering and Suppliers and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHIReserved on: 28.11.2025Pronounced on:28.02.2026+ W.P.(C) 7695/2017 & CM APPL. 32949/2023 SAIYEED MOHD JAFAR .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ritu Jain & Ms. Sreedhi Nair, Advs.versusM/S KIRAN ENGINEERING AND SUPPLIERS AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. A.K. Jain, Mrs. Santosh Jain & Mr. R.M. Tiwari, Advs.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGARJUDGMENT1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India assailing the Award dated 31.08.2013 (hereinafter referred to as impugned award) passed by learned Presiding Officer, Court No. IX, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Labour Court) in Industrial Dispute being ID No. 226/2012, whereby, the reference of the petitioner workman was dismissed.2. The facts necessary for deciding the controversy involved in the present writ petition is in narrow compass. It is stated that Sh. Saiyeed W.P.(C) 7695/2017 Page 1 of 20Mohd Jafar (he...
Rajo vs the State Govt of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Feb-27-2026
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 165/2026 RAJO .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Meena Chaudhary Sharma, and Mr. Saurabh Goel, Advs. versusTHE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel with Ms. Priyam Aggarwal, Mr. Abhinav Kumar Arya, Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advs. and SI Priyanka, AHTU, North-West District for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA ORDER % 27.02.2026 W.P.(CRL) 165/2026 1. The learned Standing Counsel has handed over a copy of the Status Report dated 25.02.2026 detailing the various efforts that have been made to trace out the missing person. 2. Till now the whereabouts of the missing person could not be traced. The learned Standing Counsel submits that as the whereabouts of the missing person could not be traced, an FIR shall be registered and further efforts shall be continued to be made to trace out the missing person. 3. Accordi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »