Delhi Court June 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.
Sanjay Verma vs M/S. Aithent Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-16-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Reserved on:5thFebruary,2026 Pronounced on: 16th June, 2026 + RFA 600/2024, CM APPL. 29628/2025 SANJAY VERMA S/o Shri Mahendra Nath Verma, R/o 50, E-SPACE, Nirvana Country, Sector 50, Gurgaon-122018. .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.C. Anand Advocate.versusAITHENT TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Through its Chief Executive Officer, A-186, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi-110020. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Venancio D'Costa and Ms. Gauri Goel, Advocates.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNAJUDGEMENTNEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.1. The present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read with Order XLIof the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been preferred by the Appellant/Plaintiff, Sanjay Verma, assailing the Judgment and Decree dated 28.03.2024, whereby the Suit for Recovery of Rs.16,49,713/- filed by the Appellant/Plaintiff came to be dismissed, by the learned District Judge.2. The Appellant/Plaintiff instituted the CS DJ No...
Satpal Kaur vs Aithent Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-16-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Reserved on: 05th February, 2026 Pronounced on: 16th June, 2026 + RFA 601/2024, CM APPL. 52604/2024, CM APPL. 69218/2024 CM APPL. 29627/2025 SATPAL KAUR W/o Shri Amardeep Singh, R/o WZ-215, G Block, Harinagar, New Delhi-110058, .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.C. Anand Advocate.versusAITHENT TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Through its Chief Executive Officer, A-186, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi-110020. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Venancio D'Costa and Ms. Gauri Goel, Advocates.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNAJ U D G M E N TNEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.1. The present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read with OrderXLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC") has been preferred by the Appellant/Plaintiff, Satpal Kaur, assailing the Judgment and Decree dated 28.03.2024 whereby the Suit for Recovery of Rs.4,14,021/- filed by the Appellant/Plaintiff has been di...
Praveen Malik vs Aithent Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-16-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Reserved on: 05th February, 2026 Pronounced on: 16thJune, 2026 + RFA 646/2024 PRAVEEN MALIK S/o Shri Ramesh C. Malik R/o A-81/3, DDA Flats, SFS, Saket, New Delhi -110017 .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.C. Anand Advocate.versusAITHENT TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Through its Chief Executive Officer, A-186, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi-110020. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Venancio D'Costa and Ms. Gauri Goel, Advocates.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNAJ U D G M E N TNEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.1. The present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read with OrderXLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as CPC) has been preferred by the Appellant/Plaintiff, Praveen Malik, assailing the Judgment and Decree dated 28.03.2024, whereby the Suit for Recovery of Rs.6,14,220/- filed by the Appellant/Plaintiff has been partly decreed by the learned District Judge, Delhi.RFA 646/2024 Page 1...
Anju Dhawan vs M/S. Aithent Technologies Pvt. Ltd..
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-16-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Reserved on: 05th February, 2026 Pronounced on: 16th June, 2026 + RFA 648/2024 ANJU DHAWAN W/o Shri Vikram Dhawan, R/o Tower 2-1701, M3M, Merlin, Gurugram-122101. .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.C. Anand Advocate.versusM/S. AITHENT TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Through its Chief Executive Officer, A-186, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi-110020. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Venancio D'Costa and Ms. Gauri Goel, Advocates.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNAJ U D G M E N TNEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.1. The present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read with OrderXLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC") has been preferred by the Appellant/Plaintiff, Anju Dhawan, assailing the Judgment and Decree dated 09.04.2024, whereby the Suit for Recovery of Rs.9,09,593/- filed by the Appellant/Plaintiff has been dismissed, by the learned Additional District Judge-10, Delhi.RF...
Sanjeev Matta vs Aithent Technologies Pvt. Ltd..
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-16-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Reserved on: 05th February, 2026 Pronounced on: 16th June, 2026 + RFA 647/2024, CM APPL. 29334/2025 SANJEEV MATTA S/o Shri Iqbal Chand Matta, R/O 504, Sector 31, Gurugram-122001, Haryana .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.C. Anand Advocate.versusAITHENT TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Through is Chief Executive Officer, A-186, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-1, New Delhi-110020 .....Respondent Through: Ms. Venancio D'Costa and Ms. Gauri Goel, Advocates.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNAJ U D G M E N TNEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.1. The present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read with OrderXLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC") has been preferred by the Appellant/Plaintiff, Sanjeev Matta, assailing the Judgment and Decree dated 20.04.2024, whereby the Suit for Recovery of Rs.4,99,649/- filed by the Appellant/Plaintiff has been dismissed, by the learned District Judge, Del...
Sanjay Kumar Nandecha vs M/S. Aithent Technologies Pvt. Ltd..
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-16-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI% Reserved on: 05th February, 2026 Pronounced on: 16th June, 2026 + RFA 649/2024, CM APPL. 29445/2025 SANJAY KUMAR NANDECHA S/o Shri Rajinder Kumar Nandecha, R/o X-14, Sector 12, Noida-201301 U.P. .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.C. Anand Advocate.versusM/S. AITHENT TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Through its Chief Executive Officer, A-186, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi-110020. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Venancio D'Costa and Ms. Gauri Goel, Advocates.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNAJ U D G M E N TNEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.1. The present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read with OrderXLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC") has been preferred by the Appellant/Plaintiff, Sanjay Kumar Nandecha, assailing the Judgment and Decree dated 20.04.2024 whereby his Suit for RFA 649/2024 Page 1 of 16 Recovery of Rs.5,52,737/- has been dismissed, by the learned Distri...
Smt. Upinder Kaur Malhotra vs Smt. Gurmeet Malhotra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-16-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHIReserved on: 27th March, 2026 Pronounced on:16th June, 2026 + RFA 1119/2025, CM APPL. 77222/2025 (stay) SMT. UPINDER KAUR MALHOTRA W/o Capt. Teghjeet Singh Malhotra, Resident of F-8/11 Vasant Vihar (FF) New Delhi-1 10057 .....Appellant Through: Ms. Nandini Sen, Mr. Basab Sengupta, Advocates.versusSMT. GURMEET MALHOTRA W/o Late Shri Surjit Singh Malhotra Rio F-8/11, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-I 10057 .....Respondent Through: Mr. Dhruv Chawla, Adhya Sinha, Advocates.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNAJ U D G M E N TNEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.1. Regular First Appeal has been preferred under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as CPC), against theJudgment and Decree dated 12.09.2025 passed by the learned Senior CivilJudge-cum-Rent Controller, New Delhi whereby the Suit of the Plaintiffs for Mandatory and Permanent Injunction, was decreed against the Signature Not Verified RFA 1119/2025 P...
Krishna Devi vs State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Jun-15-2026
$~SB-21* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(CRL) 1785/2026 KRISHNA DEVI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddarth Yadav and Mr. Anmol Kumar Pandey, Advocates.versusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Priyam Agrawal and Mr. Abhinav Arya, Advocates for Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel for State. Insp. Devinder Kumar, PS Khyala.CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAORDER% 15.06.20261. This is a Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing of the order dated 21.05.2026 passed by the Respondent.2. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the only groundfor rejecting the application for grant of parole was in view of Rule 1212 of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 (Rules), which stipulates that there should be one month gap between the parole and last furlough availed and vice-versa.3. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that Rule 1212 of th...
Preston College vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-15-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 8183/2026 PRESTON COLLEGE .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mayank Manish, Mr. Ravi Kant and Mr. Vineet Upadhyay, Advs.versusNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anuj Kapoor, Mr. Nandeesh Nanda, Advs.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAINORDER% 15.06.20261. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 38890/2026 (for exemption)2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is disposed of. W.P.(C) 8183/2026 & CM APPL. 38889/20263. This is a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:-(a) a Civil Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India for seeking direction to Respondent No.2 to update / include / reflect the name of Petitioner Institution, in the list being maintained by Respondent No.2 on its website, which list contains names / details of institutions recognised for running tea...
Pallavi Siwach @ Pallavi vs Gaurav Dabas
Court: Delhi Orders
Decided on: Jun-15-2026
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CM(M) 1307/2026 & CM APPL. 38829/2026, CM APPL. 38830/2026 PALLAVI SIWACH @ PALLAVI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Amit Kumar and Mr. Shashikant, Advs.versusGAURAV DABAS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Prateek Goswami, Adv.CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAINORDER% 15.06.20261. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.2. After some arguments, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits thathe wishes to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a fresh petition. He also seeks liberty to mention the matter before the Vacation Bench on account of urgency.3. The said liberty is granted. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.4. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.MADHU JAIN, J.(VACATION JUDGE) JUNE 15, 2026/prg/Av This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »