Delhi Court March 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.
G.D. Pharmaceuticals Private Limited vs Helbrede Healthcare Ltd & Anr.
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Mar-27-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CS(COMM) 837/2023, I.A. 23202/2023, I.A. 23203/2023, O.A. G.D. PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Vishal Nagpal, Mr. Bal Krishan Singh, Ms. Suhrita Majumdar and Mr. Debjyoti Sarkar , Advocates.versusHELBREDE HEALTHCARE LTD & ANR. ....Defendants Through: Mr. Esh Gupta, Advocate for D-1 and D-2.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELAORDER% 27.03.20261. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties submit that the inter se disputes between the parties have been amicably settled under the aegis of Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Center.2. The terms of the settlement have been reduced into writing vide theSettlement Agreement dated 08.12.2025. The terms of settlement are noted in clauses (i) to (xviii) of the Settlement Agreement. Compliances are stated to be complete.3. The Settlement Agreement dated 08.12.2025 along with its annexures is taken on record.4. Parties are bound by the ter...
Employees State Insurance Corporation and Others vs Madan Lal and Ors.
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Mar-27-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 14386/2024, CM APPL. 60181/2024 and CM APPL. 60182/2024 EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND OTHERS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Manish Kumar Saran, Mr. Sidhant Sharma and Mr Aditya Mani Saran, Advs.versusMADAN LAL AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav and Mr. Prateek Singh Yadav, Advs.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPALHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJANORDER% 27.03.20261. Learned counsel representing the Petitioner submits that he hasinstructions not to press this Petition because the Respondents have already superannuated from their posts and now, the Department does not wish to make any recovery from the Respondents.2. Accordingly, the present Petition, along with pending applications, stands dismissed as withdrawn.ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.AMIT MAHAJAN, J.MARCH 27, 2026 s.godara/kb This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Porta...
Anshul Pundhir vs Dolly
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Mar-27-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 442/2025, CRL.M.A. 29429/2025 & 29430/2025 ANSHUL PUNDHIR .....Revisionist Through: Mr. Kumar Sanu, AdvocateversusDOLLY .....Respondent Through: NoneCORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIAORDER% 27.03.20261. Matter taken up on mentioning.2. Learned counsel for revisionist seeks permission to withdraw this petition unconditionally.3. As requested, petition and the accompanying applications are dismissed as withdrawn. GIRISH KATHPALIA, J MARCH 27, 2026/asThis is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/03/2026 at 15:40:00...
Devesh Kumar vs Indian Coast Guard & Ors.
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Mar-27-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 17914/2025 DEVESH KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vineeth S Varkalavila, Adv.versusINDIAN COAST GUARD & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Suhail Malik, SPC for UOI with Mr. Aqib Zaman, Adv.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAOHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORAORDER% 27.03.20261. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has instructions to withdraw the writ petition.2. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J MARCH 27, 2026/mshThis is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/04/2026 at 12:12:22...
Arjun Kumar vs Parveen Kumar Garg
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CM(M) 3779/2024 & CM APPL. 65156/2024 ARJUN KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: None.versusPARVEEN KUMAR GARG .....Respondent Through: None.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTAORDER% 27.03.20261. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.2. As no one has appeared on behalf of the parties, let the matter be called again at 02:30 PM. RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J MARCH 27, 2026/MR/TP At 2:50 P.M.3. At this stage, it is already 2:50 P.M., no one has appeared on behalf of the petitioner.4. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed in default. Pending application (s), if any, also stand disposed of. RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J MARCH 27, 2026/MR/TPThis is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/03/2026 at 16:49:31...
The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -1 vs Alcaltel ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2026
$~16, 17, 18, 21 & 22* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 259/2026 CM APPL. 19472/2026 ALCATEL LUCENT FRANCE .....Respondent + ITA 260/2026 CM APPL. 19475/2026 ALCALTEL LUCENT INTERNATIONAL .....Respondent + ITA 261/2026 CM APPL. 19493/2026 ALCATEL LUCENT INTERNATIOANL FRANCE + ITA 264/2026 CM APPL. 19502/2026 ALCALTEL LUCENT INTERNATIONAL + ITA 265/2026 CM APPL. 19503/2026 ALCATEL LUCENT INTERNATIONAL FRANCECORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTAHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMARORDER% 27.03.20261. The present batch of appeals has been filed under section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 and following substantial question of law arises for our consideration: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the income from supply of software embedded in the hardware equipment or otherwise to customers in India does not amount to royalty under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act a...
The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -1 vs Alcaltel ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2026
$~16, 17, 18, 21 & 22* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 259/2026 CM APPL. 19472/2026 ALCATEL LUCENT FRANCE .....Respondent + ITA 260/2026 CM APPL. 19475/2026 ALCALTEL LUCENT INTERNATIONAL .....Respondent + ITA 261/2026 CM APPL. 19493/2026 ALCATEL LUCENT INTERNATIOANL FRANCE + ITA 264/2026 CM APPL. 19502/2026 ALCALTEL LUCENT INTERNATIONAL + ITA 265/2026 CM APPL. 19503/2026 ALCATEL LUCENT INTERNATIONAL FRANCECORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTAHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMARORDER% 27.03.20261. The present batch of appeals has been filed under section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 and following substantial question of law arises for our consideration: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the income from supply of software embedded in the hardware equipment or otherwise to customers in India does not amount to royalty under Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act a...
Lucy Group Ltd vs the Registrar of Trademarks
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 71/2025 LUCY GROUP LTD .....Appellant Through: Ms. Anju Agrawal, Ms. Sruthi Venugopal and Ms. Vidhi Gupta, Advocates.versusTHE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARKS .....Respondent Through: Ms. Nidhi Raman, CGSC with Mr. Om Ram and Ms. Nikita Singh, Advocates.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGHORDER% 27.03.20261. This appeal is filed on behalf of the Appellant under Section 91 of theTrade Marks Act, 1999 (1999 Act) read with Rule 156 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017 (2017 Rules) for setting aside the impugned order dated 17.04.2025 passed by the Respondent, whereby Respondent has refused registration of trademarks under Application No. 5247072 dated 14.12.2021 in Class 09.2. As per the case out in the appeal, Appellant participated in the TradeEvent Elecrama in Bengaluru on 13.02.2016 and used the mark GEMINI for the first time in India to promote and display products to its potential customers and business associates. On 16.0...
Harish Chand vs State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-2026
$~1& 3* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CRL.A. 20/2012 JANKI PRASAD .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bhari, APP with SI Pnakaj Kumar, PS Jyoti Nagar (M: 7905091459). 3 WITH + CRL.A. 552/2012 HARISH CHAND .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP.CORAM:JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE MADHU JAINORDER% 27.03.20261. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.2. Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, ld. APP confirms that the Appellants- Mr. Janki Prasad and Mr. Harish Chand, in both the appeals, have passed away.3. The factum of death of the Appellants has been verified by the State.4. Accordingly, both these appeals abate and stand disposed of.5. In respect of other accused, the appeals being CRL.A. 1251/2011 titled Charan Singh vs. State (Govt. of NCT) Delhi, CRL.A. 418/2011 titled Rinku vs. State and CRL.A. 365/2011 titled Pratap Singh v. State are listed in the regular board.6. Accordingly, the present appeals abate. No further orders are called for in the...
Rohit Singh Bafila vs the State of Nct of Delhi Through Sho & Anr.
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Mar-27-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(CRL) 3462/2025 ROHIT SINGH BAFILA .....Petitioner Through: Counsel (appearance not given).versusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH SHO & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC for the State. Mr. S.P. Sagar, Adv. for R2. Respondent No.2 in person. ASI Karan Singh, P.S. Dwarka South.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANIORDER% 27.03.2026 By way of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the petitioner seeks quashing of case FIR No. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) at P.S.: Dwarka South, Delhi, on consent.2. The petition is premised on settlement deed dated 06.08.2025 arrived at through mediation before the Mediation Centre, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi, whereby the petitioner and respondent No. 2 have resolved the matter amicably.3. The petition is also supported by affidavits of the petitioners and of respondent...
- ‹ Prev
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- Next ›
- Last »