Delhi High Court Monthly Digest: June 2023 [Citations 473 - 536]

Shah Alam v. NCT Delhi 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 523

MoolChand Kharaiti Ram Hospital & Ayurvedic Research institute v. Workers & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 524

SPP Food Products Pvt Ltd vs India Overseas Co 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 525

VODAFONE MAURITIUS LIMITED Versus ACIT 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 526

New India Assurance Co Ltd. v. Himanshu Sharma & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 527

Babu Lal Bhawariya v. State Of NCT Delhi 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 528

State v. Jeevak Nagpal 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 530

SH.PRADEEP KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P and other connected matters 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 531

MADHU BALA v. STATE 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 532

Siddharth Mishra & Ors. V. UPSC 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 533

Home Credit India B.V. Versus ACIT 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 534

South Delhi Municipal Corporation Versus B N Magon 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 535

DR. GEETA OBEROI v. NATIONAL JUDICIAL ACADEMY 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 536

Title: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGTATION v. KAPIL WADHAWAN & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 473

The Delhi High Court has said that the right to statutory bail of an accused cannot be defeated merely because police report has been filed by the investigating agency even when investigation in the case is incomplete.

“The police has a right to conduct further investigation. However, at the same time, the investigating agency under the garb of further investigation cannot be allowed to file the police report without completion of investigation, only to defeat the right of statutory bail. The basic concept is that to fulfil the provision of Section 167, the charge sheet has to be filed upon completion of investigation,” Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma observed.

Schools May Not Insist On Following ‘Neighbourhood Criteria’ Strictly For Admissions Under EWS Or DG Category: Delhi High Court

Title: TARUN KUMAR & ANR. v. THE PRINCIPAL HAPPY HOURS SCHOOL & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 474

The Delhi High Court has said that schools in the national capital may not insist upon following the “neighbourhood criteria” strictly in cases of admission under EWS or DG category, observing that it may not be possible for the Directorate of Education to follow such a criteria while allotting seats.

“This Court notes that in the present social milieu, the demand for admission under the EWS/DG category is much higher as compared to the number of seats that are available for allotment under the EWS/DG category. Therefore, if seats in a particular school are available under the EWS/DG category, then the DOE is required to allot such schools to the applicants who have applied for admission under the said category,” Justice Mini Pushkarna said.

Delhi High Court Refuses To Stay Investigation In FIR Against Ashneer Grover, His Wife For Alleged Misappropriation Of Funds In BharatPe

Title: MADHURI JAIN GROVER & ANR. v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 475

The Delhi High Court has refused to stay investigation in the FIR registered against former BharatPe Managing Director Ashneer Grover and his wife Madhuri Jain Grover for alleged misappropriation of funds and causing loss of about Rs. 80 crores to the fintech company.

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani issued notice on the plea moved by Ashneer Grover and Madhuri Jain Grover seeking quashing of the FIR registered by Delhi Police’s Economic Offences Wing on the complaint by BharatPe, as well as their application seeking stay of the investigation.

Courts Should Not Draw Conclusions At Stage Of Bail About Promise Of Marriage, Such Finding Must Await Evaluation Of Evidence At Trial: Delhi HC

Title: RR v. THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 476

The Delhi High Court on Thursday observed that it is neither appropriate nor feasible for courts to draw any conclusion or return any finding at the stage of bail of an accused as to whether a promise of marriage made to a prosecutrix was false or in bad faith.

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani added that such a a finding or decision must await a “thorough assessment and evaluation of evidence” to be led by the parties at the trial.

“This is also not the stage when the court must, or even can, finally decide if the purported false promise of marriage was of immediate relevance, or bore a direct nexus, to the prosecutrix's decision to engage in the sexual act,” the court said.

Standing Orders On Sampling Of Narcotic Drugs Must Be Respected By Probe Agencies, Can’t Be Rendered Optional For Compliance: Delhi High Court

Title: MS. BETTY RAME v. NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 477

The Delhi High Court has said that the standing orders on sampling of narcotics drugs issued by the Narcotics Control Bureau and Union Government must be respected by the probe agencies and that they cannot be rendered optional for complaince.

“Therefore, in this Court's view, the Standing Orders ought to be respected by the investigating agencies and non-compliance of those Standing Orders may naturally invoke a reasonable doubt relating to the process of sampling which is the most critical procedure to be carried out in order to ascertain the nature of the substance and its quantity. In fact, the Field Officers Handbook issued by the Narcotics Control Bureau for Drug Law Enforcement also reiterates these procedures prescribed under the Standing Orders,” Justice Anish Dayal said.

Merely Being Named In FIR On Matrimonial Offences Can’t Be Treated As Impediment For Public Appointment: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Vikram Ruhal v. Delhi Police & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 478

Observing that merely naming in the FIR does not lead to an inference that the employer can keep in abeyance the employment of an applicant for an indefinite period, the Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Police to appoint a candidate to the Sub Inspector post, whose employment was kept pending till the disposal of the FIR pending against him.

The court also noted that he was placed in Column No. 12 of the charge-sheet and the evidence did not establish his involvement in matrimonial offences,

“He should have been logically considered suitable for appointment. Merely being named in the FIR cannot be treated as an impediment for public appointment, unless the involvement is substantiated on investigation, specially in relation to matrimonial offences,” said the court.

Show Cause Notice Lacks Reasons In Detail For Denial Of Refund Of ITC To Mcdonald’s India: Delhi High Court

Case Title: M/S Mcdonalds India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Additional Commissioner

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 479

The Delhi High Court has held that the show cause notice lacks reasons in detail for the denial of refund of Input Tax Credit (ITC) to Mcdonald's India.

The bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan found that there was no basis for the Appellate Authority to have concluded that the petitioner acts as a mediator between joint ventures or franchisees and McDonald’s USA. The Appellate Authority has not considered that the Master License Agreement (MLA), which entitles the petitioner to enter into sub-licenses with franchisees, is a separate agreement.

CCI’s Power Is To Regulate Markets, Not To Review Decisions Of Statutory Regulators: Delhi High Court

Title: INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA v. THE COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 480

The Delhi High Court has held that power of the Competition Commission of India is limited to regulating markets and does not extend to reviewing the decisions taken by statutory regulators in exercise of their statutory powers.

Emphasizing that the power does not extend to “addressing any grievance” regarding arbitrary action by any statutory authority, Justice Vibhu Bakhru said:

“The CCI has wide powers under the Competition Act but this Court is unable to accept that the said powers extend to reviewing all decisions made by statutory bodies or a foreign government, which are not relatable to a sovereign function of the Government. The scope of examination must be confined to only those areas of economic activities, which have a bearing on the market that engages entities involved in trade and commerce.”

Spicejet Should Pay Entire Arbitral Award Of Rs 380 Crore To Its Former Promotor Kalanithi Maran: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Kal Airways Pvt. Ltd vs M/s Spicejet Ltd. & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 481

The Delhi High Court has directed SpiceJet to pay the entire arbitral award of Rs. 380 crore to the airline’s former promotor, Kalanithi Maran, and his firm, Kal Airways Pvt. Ltd, in an execution petition filed by Maran seeking enforcement of a 2018 arbitral award passed in his favour.

The court has also directed the airline to file an Affidavit of its assets within the specified time frame.

Third Party Funders In Arbitration Play A Vital Role In Ensuring Access To Justice; Arbitral Award Cannot Be Enforced Against Them: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Tomorrow Sales Agency Private Limited vs SBS Holdings, Inc. and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 482

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a third-party funder, i.e., a non-signatory to arbitration agreement, who is not a party to the arbitral proceedings or the award, cannot be held liable for the awarded amount merely because it has funded a party in arbitral proceedings.

The court dismissed the contention that third-party funders must be held liable for funding impecunious persons who are unsuccessful in pursuing their claims in the arbitral proceedings. It held that permitting enforcement of an arbitral award against a non-party which has not accepted any such risk, is neither desirable nor permissible.

Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Malvinder Mohan Singh In Religare Finvest Scam Case

Title: MALVINDER MOHAN SINGH v. STATE NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 483

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Malvinder Mohan Singh, erstwhile promoter of Religare Enterprises Limited, in the alleged Religare Finvest scam case amounting to Rs.2397 crores.

Justice Amit Sharma said that no possible prejudice can be caused to prosecution’s case before the trial Court if Singh is released on bail with necessary conditions, especially when other co-accused persons have been granted bail.

The Expression “Any” Member of Arbitral Tribunal Cannot Be Read As “All Members”: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Private Limited vs Union of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 484

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the expression “any member” contained in a clause that lays down a mandatory qualification to be appointed as arbitrator, cannot be read as “all members” of the Arbitral Tribunal. The court said that the phrase “any member” must be interpreted in the context in which it is used.

The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma was dealing with an Arbitration Clause that required that “any member” of the Arbitration Tribunal shall be a “Graduate Engineer with experience in handling public works engineering contracts” at a level “not lower than Chief Engineer (Joint Secretary level of Government of India)”. The said Clause provided that the same was “a mandatory qualification to be appointed as arbitrator”.

Schools Can’t Deny Admission To Students Under EWS/DG Category On Unjustified Grounds After Allotment By Directorate Of Education: Delhi High Court

Title: SHAHNAZ KHATOON & ORS. v. GD GOENKA PUBLIC SCHOOL

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 485

The Delhi High Court has ruled that schools in the national capital cannot deny admissions to students under the Economically Weaker Section or Disadvantaged Group category once there is a valid allotment by the Directorate of Education.

Justice Mini Pushkarna said that the court cannot ignore the fact that disadvantaged groups of the society have to be given equal opportunities to come forward in life.

Imminent Need To Update Patent Manual For Better Guidance Of Examiners & Controllers: Delhi High Court

Title: AGFA NV & ANR. v. THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 486

The Delhi High Court has observed that there is an imminent need to update the “Manual of Patent Office Practice and Procedure” so that the Examiners and Controllers can get better guidance on dealing with intricate matters related to complex inventions.

“As the number of Patent filings in India are rapidly increasing and there is an imminent need to update the Manual of Patent Office Practice and Procedure so that Examiners and Controllers can get better guidance on dealing intricate matters like objections of lack of clarity and succinctness. This would be particularly useful when dealing with complex patents involving Artificial Intelligence systems, machine learning functions, agro- chemicals, pharmaceuticals and manufacturing methods,” Justice Amit Bansal said.

‘Balance Rent’ During The Lock-In Period Is A Genuine Pre-Estimate Of Loss, Requires No Further Of Actual Loss: Delhi High Court

Case Title: DAG PRIVATE LIMITED V. RAVI SHANKAR INSTITUTE FOR MUSIC AND PERFORMING ARTS

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 487

The Delhi High Court has upheld an arbitral award wherein the arbitrator held that the ‘Balance Rent’ during the lock-in period is a genuine pre-estimate of loss which requires no further proof of loss.

The bench of Justice V. Kameshwar Rao held that when the contract provides for payment of entire balance rent for the lock-in period if the deed is terminated before the expiry of the lock-in period, it would be a genuine pre-estimate of the losses that the lessor would bear for the early termination of the contract/deed. It held that lock-in period acts an assurance for the lessee that his possession would not be disturbed and it also guarantees the lessor a certain sum of money for a definite period and any breach involves consequences for both the parties.

Delhi High Court Directs Indian Kanoon To Mask Name Of Man Acquitted In Rape Case, Asks It To Disclose Its Policy On Right To Be Forgotten

Title: SK v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 488

The Delhi High Court recently directed Indian Kanoon to mask the name of a 29-year-old man who was acquitted in a rape case in 2018

Justice Prathiba M Singh was hearing the plea moved by the man seeking masking of his name in the judgment acquitting him in the FIR filed under section 376 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. The trial court in July 2018 acquitted him of all charges.

Don’t Insist On Requirement Of Fitment Of Speed Governors In Vehicles For Guests Attending G20 Summit: High Court To Delhi Govt

Title: INDIAN TOURIST TRANSPORTERS ASSOCIATION (REGD.) v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 489

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government to not insist on the requirement of fitment of speed governors in high-end vehicles to be used as taxis for the guests attending the G20 summit scheduled to be held in the national capital in August and September.

A division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Saurabh Banerjee granted relief to Indian Tourist Transporters Association which is solely involved in providing surface transport facilities to the foreign or domestic tourists. The Association is recognized by the Union Ministry of Tourism.

Title: PANKAJ BANSAL v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) & ANR. and other connected matter

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 508

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the discretion of an applicant to choose either High Court or trial court for moving anticipatory bail plea cannot be restricted by construing section 438 of CrPC narrowly.

Analyzing the provision, a vacation bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said that there is no bar on approaching the High Court directly for seeking anticipatory bail and that both the courts have concurrent jurisdiction to deal with such cases.

“It is discretionary for the Applicant either to approach the High Court or the Court of Session. There is no restraint cast upon the Applicant to approach this Court first. It is based upon the discretion of the Applicant which Court they want to approach since both the Court have concurrent jurisdiction and the same cannot be restricted by construing the provision of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. narrowly,” the court said.

Permissible To Change Surname To Avoid Prejudices Attached To A Particular Caste, Right To Life Includes ‘Right To Identity’: Delhi High Court

Title: SADANAND AND ANR. v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 509

Observing that right to identity is an intrinsic part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Delhi High Court has said that it is permissible for an individual to change his or her surname to be not able to be identified with any particular caste “that may be a cause of prejudice” to such person. The change will not lead to advantage of any reservation or any other benefit that may be available to the adopted caste/surname, said the court.

“The Right to Identity is an intrinsic part of Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. There is no denying the fact that Right to Life includes within its ambit, the Right to Live with Dignity, which includes not to be tied down by any casteism that a person may face on account of the caste to which such person belongs. Thus, if a person wants to change his or her surname, so as not to be identified with any particular caste that may be a cause of prejudice to such person in any manner, the same is permissible,” Justice Mini Pushkarna held in a judgment passed on May 19.

Revisional Court Can’t Make Deposition Of Arrears A Condition For Grant Of Stay On Interim Maintenance Order U/S 125 CrPC: Delhi High Court

Title: RS v. MB

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 510

The Delhi High Court has observed that a revisional court, while considering the grant of stay of the interim maintenance order passed under section 125 of CrPC, cannot put a general direction of depositing the entire maintenance amount by ignoring the facts of circumstances of the case.

“While exercising the revisional scrutiny of an interim maintenance order passed in proceedings under Section 125 CrPC, the revisional court for yet another reason cannot impose as a pre-condition to grant of stay on operation of the assailed interim maintenance order, such general rider of deposit of the entire amount of awarded maintenance ignoring the overall circumstances of the case,” a vacation bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia observed.

Delhi High Court Permits 13-Yr-Old Rape Victim To Undergo Medical Termination Of Pregnancy, Directs DSLSA To Look Into Grant Of Compensation

Title: MINOR VICTIM-V v. THE STATE & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 511

The Delhi High Court has permitted a 13-year-old minor rape victim to undergo medical termination of pregnancy with 24 to 26 weeks old foetus.

A vacation bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh also directed the Delhi State Legal Services Authority to look into the compensation to be paid to the minor.

On June 09, the court had directed the medical board, comprising of minimum two doctors at Guru Tegh Bahadur Hospital, to review the minor’s case for medical termination of her pregnancy.

Perusing the medical report submitted by the board, Justice Singh ordered: “In view of the opinion of the medical board wherein it has been opined that the continuation of pregnancy in this case carries the higher risk to both the mother and the foetus, it is directed that the termination of pregnancy be effected as soon as possible by the doctors at Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital.”

Liquor Policy Case: Delhi High Court Grants Interim Bail To Businessman Sameer Mahendru In Money Laundering Case

Title: SAMEER MAHANDRU v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 512

The Delhi High Court has granted interim bail for six weeks on medical grounds to businessman Sameer Mahendru in the money laundering case related to the implementation of previous liquor policy in national capital.

A vacation bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, who had reserved the judgment on June 07, directed that Mahendru be released from jail forthwith and that he shall surrender before the concerned Trial Court on July 25 on the expiry of the interim bail.

Credit War Over JEE Result: Delhi High Court Denies Interim Relief To FIITJEE In Suit Against Allen Coaching Centre

Title: FIITJEE LIMITED v. ALLEN EDUCATION AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 513

The Delhi High Court has denied interim relief to coaching institute FIITJEE in its suit against Allen Career Institute alleging that the latter claimed credit for one of its student’s result who successfully cleared the JEE (Mains) 2023 examination.

It was FIITJEE’s case that the student, Malay Kedia, opted for its “Four Year Classroom Program for IIT-JEE (Advanced)-Weekend Contact Classes” and enrolled himself in one of its coaching centres in 2018. The suit stated that the student attended classes till September 2022 but stopped after October 07 last year.

Delhi High Court Extends Custody Parole Of PFI National Coordinator By Two Hours For Daughter’s Wedding In Kerala

Title: IBRAHIM PUTHANATHANI v. NIA

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 514

The Delhi High Court has extended the custody parole of Popular Front of India’s National Coordinator Ibrahim Puthanathani, accused in a UAPA case registered by NIA, from four hours to six hours to enable him attend his elder daughter’s wedding in Kerala.

The UAPA case was registered against PFI, its leaders and cadres. NIA’s chargesheet against Puthanathani alleges that he was responsible for organizing and conducting arms training camps across various states on behalf of Popular Front of India.

A special NIA court on May 24 had granted custody parole to Puthanathani for four hours to visit Kerala for attending his daughter’s wedding. He then moved the High Court challenging the trial court order with a prayer to grant him interim bail.

Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Preeti Chandra In Money Laundering Case, Says Order Be Not Given Effect Till June 16 After ED Request

Title: Preeti Chandra v. ED

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 515

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Preeti Chandra, the wife of Unitech promoter Sanjay Chandra, in a money laundering case probed by Enforcement Directorate.

However, at the request of ED, Justice Jasmeet Singh said that the order be not given effect to till Friday. As the court pronounced the order, ED Counsel Zoheb Hossain requested that the order may not be given effect to till June 16 as the agency has to challenge the same. The appeal will become infructuous, Hossain added.

Also Read: Woman Can’t Be Classified Based On Their Education Or Occupation For Bail Under Proviso To Section 45(1) PMLA: Delhi High Court

No Pruning Of Trees Will Be Permitted In Delhi Except In Accordance With Delhi Preservation of Trees Act: Delhi High Court

Title: PROF DR SANJEEV BAGAI & ORS. v. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST) & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 516

The Delhi High Court has set aside the Delhi Government’s Guidelines permitting regular pruning of branches of trees with girth upto 15.7 cm without prior permission of the Tree Officer.

“In view of the above, no pruning of trees will be permitted in Delhi except in accordance with the DPT Act. It will be open to the respondents to frame guidelines and/or rules as may be requisite,” Justice Najmi Waziri said in an order passed on May 29.

Delhi High Court Quashes SCN For Being Devoid Of Reasons, Restores GST Registration

Case Title: Rishiraj Aluminium Private Limited Versus Goods And Service Tax Officer

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 517

The Delhi High Court has quashed the show cause notice as it was devoid of reasons and restored the GST registration.

The bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gadela observed that the show cause notice was deficient. It does not sufficiently disclose the reasons why the petitioner’s GST registration was suspended or was proposed to be canceled. It is well settled that a show cause notice must clearly set out the reasons for proposing an adverse action in order for the noticee to respond to the same.

Rule 89(4) Under CGST Rules Inapplicable On Refund Of Integrated Tax Paid On Zero-Rated Supply: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Ohmi Industries Asia Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 518

The Delhi High Court has held that Rule 89(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 is inapplicable to cases of refund of integrated tax paid on zero-rated supply.

The bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan has noted that the opening sentence of Rule 89(4) makes it amply clear that it applies only in cases of zero-rated supply of goods or services without payment of tax under a bond or letter of undertaking.

In City Gasping For Breath, Felling Of Trees Should Be Last Resort: Delhi High Court

Title: ALL RESIDENTS WELFARE SOCIETY (ARWS). v. CAELUM ARPIT BRAND TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 519

Observing that felling of trees should be the last resort in national capital, the Delhi High Court has restrained the Delhi Development Authority and others from clearing of land and felling of trees on a plot located in Vasant Kunj.

“In a city gasping for breath, I am of the view that felling of trees should be the last resort. In case, any other alternative site is available, the same must be looked at,” said Justice Jasmeet Singh in the order.

Construction Workers Can’t Be Deprived Of Right Of Pension Merely Due To Hyper-Technical Issues: Delhi High Court

Case Title: BADAM VERVA v. DELHI BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 520

The right of pension of construction workers cannot be deprived of merely due to hyper-technical issues or requirements such as production of original MR Slips or serial number of the notary records, the Delhi High Court has recently observed.

Noting that a large number of construction workers are either illiterate or even semi-illiterate and hail from rural background, Justice Prathiba M Singh added that their pension benefit application must be processed without any delay.

Orders Of Arbitral Tribunal Not Signed By All Arbitrators And Absence Of An Arbitrator During Certain Proceedings, Cannot Be A Ground To Set Aside Award: Delhi High Court

Case Title: MMTC Limited vs Aust Grain Exports Pty. Ltd

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 521

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that procedural irregularity cannot be a ground to set aside the Arbitral Award unless such irregularity goes to the root of the matter and shocks the conscience of the Court, thus making the Award illegal.

The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh made the observation while dismissing a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), challenging the majority Arbitral Award passed against the petitioner, MMTC Ltd.

Case Title: Sachin @ Joginder Singh v. State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 522

Quashing an FIR related to an altercation, the Delhi High Court directed the accused to plant 10 trees each of indigenous variety in the vicinity of their residence, in consultation with the Investigating Officer.

Justice Jasmeet Singh asked the IO to get in touch with the concerned Horticulture Department of the MCD and indicate the area, where the trees are to be planted. "The trees need not be in one cluster but can be in parks, boundary walls etc, wherever the concerned department deems it fit and proper. The plantation process shall be carried out within 4 weeks," said the court.

The FIR was registered Sections 308, 452, 341, 506, 323 and 34 IPC, and has been quashed after the parties compromised the matter.

Imprisonment At Trial Stage Cannot Be Prolonged Only For Teaching Accused A Lesson: Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Accused In Kidnapping Case

Case Title: Shah Alam v. NCT Delhi

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 523

Granting bail to an accused in a case of kidnapping for ransom after a custody of almost two years and nine months, the Delhi High Court said that at the stage of the trial, imprisonment cannot be prolonged only for the purpose of teaching the accused a lesson.

Justice Vikas Mahajan said it is trite that the seriousness of an offence is not the only criteria for denial of bail.

"A person who has not been convicted should only be kept in custody, if there is a possibility that he or she might abscond or tamper with evidence or threaten the witness. Merely because the offence is of a serious nature, cannot be the ground to curtail the personal liberty of an under trial for an indefinite period," said the court.

Enterprise Being Run On Commercial Lines Involving Generation Of Profit Cannot Escape Liability Under Payment Of Bonus Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: MoolChand Kharaiti Ram Hospital & Ayurvedic Research institute v. Workers & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 524

Observing that an enterprise being run on commercial lines cannot escape liability under Payment of Bonus Act, the Delhi High Court recently upheld a single judge bench’s decision of upholding Industrial Tribunal Award to pay bonus for the year 1997-98 to the workers of Moolchand Kharaiti Ram Hospital & Ayurvedic Research Institute.

“If an enterprise is being run on commercial lines involving generation of profit then it cannot escape liability under the Act by contending that it was not established for the purpose of profit,” said the division bench of Justice Najmi Waziri and Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain.

Process Of Court Cannot Be Utilized For Gathering Information About Whereabouts Of Judgment Debtor: Delhi High Court

Case Title: SPP Food Products Pvt Ltd vs India Overseas Co

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 525

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the process of the court cannot be utilized for the purpose of gathering information as to the whereabouts or other information in respect of the judgment debtor.

The court said it is the primary obligation of the decree holder itself to obtain such information from wherever it is possible.

The bench of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela made the observations while dismissing a petition challenging the order of the trial court that had rejected the application filed by decree holder, SPP Food Products Pvt Ltd, in the execution proceedings initiated against the judgment debtor, India Overseas Co.

Delhi High Court Directs AO To Provide Information To Vodafone Mauritius To Drive Out The Validity Of TRC

Case Title: VODAFONE MAURITIUS LIMITED Versus ACIT

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 526

The Delhi High Court has directed the AO to provide information to Vodafone Mauritius to determine the validity of the Tax Residency Certificate (TRC).

The bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Girish Kathpalia has observed that nothing in the form of information or material has been put to the petitioner, which would conclude that the TRC issued to the petitioner was not a viable document in law.

The petitioner has challenged the order and notice passed by the Assessing Officer without regard to the Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) issued in its favour.

Delhi High Court Orders Plantation Of At least 10,000 Trees To Utilise Money Recovered From Defaulting Litigants

Case Title: New India Assurance Co Ltd. v. Himanshu Sharma & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 527

The Delhi High Court has ordered for plantation of at least 10,000 trees in the national capital to utilise over Rs 80 lakhs that were deposited in the court as costs imposed on defaulting parties in different cases including contempt and writ petitions.

“These monies are to be utilized for larger public good. Plantation of trees is one such exercise which the court would consider because trees, for as long as they are alive, be it for decades or for centuries, would incessantly and silently provide multiple benefits to the city; provided however, that people and the land- owning agencies do not interfere in or hinder their growth,”said Justice Najmi Waziri.

Delhi High Court Rejects Bail Plea Of Teacher Accused Of Raping His Student

Case Title: Babu Lal Bhawariya v. State Of NCT Delhi

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 528

The Delhi High Court has rejected the bail plea of a teacher who was accused of repeatedly raping his minor student and threatening to make video-recording of it viral. The accused stands booked under section 376 of IPC and section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

“The court cannot also ignore the fact that since the petitioner and the prosecutrix were interacting as teacher and student, the alleged offence, if it comes to be proved during trial, takes an egregious and aggravated form, particularly in view of the specific statutory mandate under section 376(2)(f) of the IPC and section 5(f) of the POCSO Act,” Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani said in the order.

Case Title: Darpan Kohli Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 529

The Delhi High Court held that an assessment order cannot be directed against only one of the legal heirs of a deceased assessee.

The Bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Girish Kathpalia has set aside an assessment order of Rs. 10 crores passed by the Income Tax Department, solely on the ground that it was passed against only one of the legal heirs of the deceased assessee and not against all legal heirs.

Delhi High Court Commutes Death Penalty Of Man For Murder Of 12-Yr-Old, Modifies Sentence To 20 Yrs Rigorous Imprisonment Without Remission

Title: State v. Jeevak Nagpal

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 530

The Delhi High Court on Monday commuted the death sentence awarded to a man for kidnapping and murdering a 12-year-old minor boy in 2009.

A division bench of Justice Mukta Gupta and Justice Anish Dayal modified the sentence awarded to Jeevak Nagpal to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment without remission. Nagpal was awarded death penalty by the trial court in 2020. He was 21 at the time of the crime and 32 years old when he was convicted.

Custodial Death Of 26-Yr-Old: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction, 10 Years Sentence Of Uttar Pradesh Cops In 2006 Case

Title: SH.PRADEEP KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P and other connected matters

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 531

The Delhi High Court today upheld the conviction and 10 years of sentence awarded to five cops of the Uttar Pradesh Police over custodial torture resulting in death of a young 26-years-old man in 2006. They were convicted and sentenced in the year 2019.

A division bench of Justice Mukta Gupta and Justice Anish Dayal dismissed the appeals moved by the five police officials and upheld the trial court order convicting them for the offences punishable under sections 304 (causing death by negligence), 220 (commitment for trial or confinement by person having authority who knows that he is acting contrary to law), 365 (kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person), 167 (public servant framing an incorrect document with intent to cause injury) and 34 (common intent) of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Ensure Sufficient Number Of Short, Long Stay Homes For Mentally Ill Inmates: High Court To Delhi Govt

Title: MADHU BALA v. STATE

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 532

The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government to ensure that a sufficient number of short and long stay homes are available for mentally ill inmates who do not require regular hospitalization and have no homes to go back to live in a safe environment.

Observing that it is the bounden duty of the State to take care of the life of all its citizen, a division bench of Justice Mukta Gupta and Justice Poonam A. Bamba said:

“It is hoped and expected that in terms of the directions of this Court in Charanjit Singh (supra) the State will ensure sufficient number of Short Stay Homes and Long Stay Homes for people with mental illness who do not require regular hospitalization and who have no homes to go back to live in a safe, congenial and pleasant environment.”

Civil Services Exam 2023: Delhi High Court Refuses Interim Relief, Asks CAT To Expeditiously Decide Plea Seeking Reduction In CSAT Cut Off

Title: Siddharth Mishra & Ors. V. UPSC

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 533

The Delhi High Court has asked the Central Administrative Tribunal to decide expeditiously the plea seeking reduction in the cut off from 33% to 23% for qualifying Part II (CSAT) exam of 2023 Civil Services Examination conducted by UPSC last month.

A vacation bench of Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Manoj Jain refused the interim relief and disposed of a petition moved by a group of civil services aspirants against the Tribunal’s refusal to grant any interim relief.

AO Unclear whether The Notice Is Issued To An Individual Or A Corporate Entity: Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notice

Case Title: Home Credit India B.V. Versus ACIT

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 534

The Delhi High Court has quashed the reassessment notice for non-application of mind by the department.

The bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Girish Kathpalia has directed the AO to recommence the proceeding if deemed necessary after gathering the relevant material that would show that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by the petitioner.

Advocates' Office Run From Residence Not Subject To Property Tax As Business Building : Delhi High Court

Case Title: South Delhi Municipal Corporation Versus B N Magon

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 535

Holding that the "professional activity" of lawyers cannot be seen as "commercial activity", the Delhi High Court held that an advocate's office run from a residential building is not subject to property tax under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act as a "business building".

The division bench of Justice Najmi Waziri and Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain noted that the Master Plan for Delhi(MPD), 2021 permits professional activity in residential buildings, subject to certain conditions. However, the said provision of MPD, does not empower the Corporation to levy tax for professional activity being carried out from residential buildings.

Delhi High Court Upholds Decision To Terminate Services Of National Judicial Academy’s Professor

Title: DR. GEETA OBEROI v. NATIONAL JUDICIAL ACADEMY

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 536

The Delhi High Court has upheld the termination of Dr. Geeta Oberoi, a contractual professor of National Judicial Academy, Bhopal on the basis of a show cause notice issued to her in 2021 over allegations of “encouraging and harbouring” stray dogs inside the campus.

Justice Jasmeet Singh dismissed the plea of the professor, who was working in the Academy since 2014, challenging the show cause notice issued on February 01, 2021, by the Academy’s Director as well as order of the Executive Committee passed on May 13 terminating her appointment.