Citations 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 524 to 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 665NOMINAL INDEXAMARJEET GUPTA v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 524ANIL KUMAR HAJELAY & ORS. v. HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 525M/S Krish Overseas Versus Commissioner Central Tax-Delhi West & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 526ACTION COMMITTEE UNAIDED RECOGNIZED PRIVATE SCHOOLS v. DIRECTORATE...
Citations 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 524 to 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 665
NOMINAL INDEX
AMARJEET GUPTA v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 524
ANIL KUMAR HAJELAY & ORS. v. HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 525
M/S Krish Overseas Versus Commissioner Central Tax-Delhi West & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 526
DELHI BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD v. DULARI DEVI & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 528
PFIZER PRODUCTS INC. v. RENOVISION EXPORTS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 529
SHOAIB ALAM @ BOBBY v. STATE and other connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 530
ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY v. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 531
CIT verses Dabur India Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 532
Shri Sita Ram & Others vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 533
LAWYER'S VOICE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 534
Remy Israni vs R. B. Seth Jessa Ram Hospital And Bros 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 535
M/S Madras Trading Co Vs Ramjeet @ Ramajeet & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 536
SUNNY ALIAS RAVI KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHII 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 537
SUNAYANA SIBAL & ORS. v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 538
VIJAY DARDA v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 539
National Highways Authority Of India Vs M/S Kcc Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 540
Feroz Ahmed Bhatt Vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 541
Dr. Shashi Bhushan Vs. University of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 542
Kanchanjunga Building Employees Union Vs Kanchanjunga Flat Owner's Society & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 543
Pawan Kumar Mathuri. vs UOI & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 544
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT v. AKHILESH SINGH & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 545
MANISH GOEL v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 546
AIIMS vs Ashok Kumar 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 547
ASHOK KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 548
Right Choice Marketing Solutions Jlt & Ors Vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 549
Commissioner of Police & Ors vs Sant Ram 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 550
Amit Chakraborty v. State 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 551
AMMAR ABDUL RAHIMAN v. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 552
KAMLESH DEVI v. STATE OF DELHI NCT & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 553
Global Vectra Helicorp Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 554
ANKIT MISHRA & ANR. v. SANTOSH SHARMA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 555
PRITPAL SINGH v. STATE 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 556
SONU @ SUNIL v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 557
Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors vs Virender 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 558
E-EIGHTEEN.COM LTD vs KRISHNAA @ JAGTAR SINGH & ORS (Del) 559
The Executive Engineer & Ors. Vs M/S Bholasingh Jaiprakash Construction Ltd. & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 560
International Avenue Vs Delhi Transport Corporation 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 561
MAXWELL PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGD v. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD AND ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 562
H v. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 563
SHRIKANT PRASAD v. GOVT OF N.C.T OF DELHI AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 564
SBI Cards And Payment Services Private Limited Vs Kony Inc. & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 565
SANJAY RAGHUNATH PIPLANI AND ANR. v. NATIONAL BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION DELHI AND ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 566
THE INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LIMITED v. SHIVGYAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 567
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. v. MR PRABHJOT SINGH DHILLON 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 568
Microsoft, Google v. Union of India & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 569
SONU SONKAR v. THE LT GOVERNOR, DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 570
SANJAY GOEL v. MAJESTIC BUILDCON PVT. LTD. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 571
SANJAY KANSAL v. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 572
THE INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LIMITED v. JOHN DOE AND OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 573
Acme Heergarh Powertech Private Limited Versus CBIC 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 574
Zenith Leisure Holidays Ltd. Vs Union Of India & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 575
TULIR CHARITABLE TRUST v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 576
Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd Vs Govt Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 577
VI Exports India Private Limited Versus Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 578
Ankit Madan Versus Registrar, Customs, Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal & Ors. 024 LiveLaw (Del) 579
ANJALI COLLEGE OF PHARMACY AND SCIENCE THROUGH ITS FOUNDER -CUM-CHAIRMAN DEVENDRA GUPTA v. DR. MONTU M. PATEL PRESIDENT PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 580
Shaheen Abdulla & Ors. v. Election Commission of India 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 581
Jasmine Kaur Chhabra v. UOI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 582
M/S Durga Trading Company And Ors Versus The Additional Director General (Adjudication) And Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 583
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION AUTHORITY OF INDIA, & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 585
SARVESH v. ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 586
SUNAYANA SIBAL & ORS. v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 587
BEIERSDORF AG v. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 588
State v. PDD and other connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 590
Mercator Ltd. Vs Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd And Connected Matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 591
Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 592
Tipping Mr Pink Private Limited Vs Tipping Mr Pink Private Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 594
Deepak Maurya Vs Saraswathi Supari Processing Unit & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 595
KARIM HOTELS PVT LTD & ANR v. NIZAMUDDIN & ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 596
Delhi Tourism And Transportation Development Corporation Vs M/S Satinder Mahajan 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 597
Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 599
SANJEEV KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 600
Rachita Francis Xavier v Union of India & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 601
JAIKISHAN KAKUBHAI SARAF ALIAS JACKIE SHROFF v. THE PEPPY STORE & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 602
Relaxo Footwears Limited v XS Brands Consultancy Private Limited & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 603
REKHA AND ORS v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 604
TWC AVIATION CAPITAL LIMITED v. SPICEJET LIMITED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 605
JACOB VADAKKANCHERY v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 606
AMIT SAHNI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 607
We, the People of India v. Union of India and Others 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 608
MOUNTAIN VALLEY SPRINGS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. BABY FOREST AYURVEDA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S LANDSMILL HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED) & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 609
BILAL AHMAD MIR ALIAS BILAL MIR ALIAS BILLA v. NATIONAL INVESTIGATING AGENCY NEW DELHI and other connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 610
Masasasong Ao Vs National Iinvestigation Agency 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 611
Ajay Singh and Anr vs Kal Airways Private Limited & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 612
PT Bukaka Teknik Utama Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax (IT), Delhi – 2 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 613
UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS PRODUCTIONS LLLP & ORS. v. MOVIES123.LA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 614
Manish Sisodia v. ED, CBI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 615
Dollar Gulati Vs PCIT and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 616
Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Vs Assessment Unit 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 617
AMAR SINGH BHATIA & ANR. v. SIR GANGA RAM HOSPITAL & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 618
CHHAVI v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 619
Vishal Dhiren Shah Vs Union Of India, Through Ministry Of Corporate Affairs & Anr. And Connected Matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 620
Ashneer Grover v. Union of India & Ors. and other connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 621
MD SHAMI AHMAD ANSARI & ANR v. JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA & ORS and other connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 622
SUDHA PRASAD v. UDAY PAL SINGH 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 623
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. RANJEET SINGH MALHOTRA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 624
Seagate Technology LLC v Daichi International & connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 625
Kishore Kumar Makwana vs Union Of India & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 627
RAJASTHAN EQUESTRAIN ASSOCIATION v. EQUESTRIAN FEDERATION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 628
VASU SACHDEVA v. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 629
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -15 Versus Shiv Kumar Nayyar 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 630
Akshay Choudhary Vs Union Of India Ministry Of Home Affairs & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 631
Delhivery Limited Vs. Far Left Retail Private Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 632
New Delhi Television Limited Versus Dispute Resolution Panel 2 & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 633
VLS FINANCE LTD v. STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 634
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGTATION v. R. VASUDEVAN & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 635
Shantanu Prakash Vs State Bank Of India & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 636
Arabian Oilfield Suppliers & Services Vs Greka Drilling (India) Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 637
MUNNA SINGH & ANR. v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 638
SHREE HANUMANT DHARMIK RAMLEELA COMMITTEE REGD & ANR. v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 639
SHRIKANT PRASAD v. GOVT OF N.C.T OF DELHI AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 640
SpiceJet v. TWC Aviation 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 641
YAMIN ALI v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 643
REKHA OBEROI v. AMIT OBEROI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 644
ABOOBACKER E. v. National Investigation Agency 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 645
ED v. Ajay S Mittal 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 646
MANJU TOKAS & ANR v. GNCT OF DELHI THROUGH DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 647
PRACHEEN SHIV MANDIR AVAM AKHADA SAMITI v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 649
CAPTAIN DEEPAK KUMAR v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 650
Dr. Satendra Singh Vas Union Of India & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 651
Purvanchal Hathkargha Sahakari Sangh Ltd Vs All India Handloom Fabrics Society And Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 652
M/S Power Mech Projects Ltd Vs M/S Doosan Power Systems India Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 654
CA RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA v. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 655
Abhimanyu Through Special Power Of Attorney Holder Vs Parmesh Construction Co. Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 656
RAJESH KUMAR MEHTA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 657
DELHI TAMIL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION v. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 659
Communication Component Antenna Inc v. Mobi Antenna Technologies 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 660
SANSER PAL SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 661
KAMLESH JAIN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 662
Colgate Palmolive Company & Ors v State of NCT & Anr & Connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 663
Jaipuria Edutech Foundation vs. Shyamlalbabu Educational Trust 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 664
Sanjay Khatri vs. State of NCT of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 665
Title: AMARJEET GUPTA v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 524
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking a direction upon the Election Commission of India (ECI) to develop a mechanism to ensure that arrested political leaders are allowed to campaign through VC for the ongoing Lok Sabha polls 2024.
A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora said that it is a highly adventurous plea, contrary to fundamental principles of law.
Case Title: ANIL KUMAR HAJELAY & ORS. v. HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 525
The Delhi High Court has recently issued various directions for implementing the project for having hybrid hearing in the courts in the national capital.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora directed the Delhi Government to forthwith expedite the financial sanction in respect of all 691 courts as stated in preliminary estimate of approximately Rs. 387 crore.
Life Of Provisional Attachment Order Is Only One Year: Delhi High Court
Case Title: M/S Krish Overseas Versus Commissioner Central Tax-Delhi West & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 526
The Delhi High Court has held that the life of an order of provisional attachment is only one year.
The bench of Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Ravinder Dudeja has observed that the communication of attachment is dated August 14, 2019, and a period of one year has elapsed since the issuance of the communication.
Title: ACTION COMMITTEE UNAIDED RECOGNIZED PRIVATE SCHOOLS v. DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 527
The Delhi High Court has stayed a circular issued by the Delhi Government stating that no recognized private unaided school in the national capital, which has been allotted land by government agencies, shall enhance fee for the upcoming 2024-25 academic session without the prior sanction of Director of Education (DoE).
Justice C Hari Shankar stayed the circular issued on March 27 which barred all Private Recognized Unaided Schools from raising the fee without prior sanction of the DoE.
Title: DELHI BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD v. DULARI DEVI & ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 528
The Delhi High Court has observed that monthly pension of Rs. 3000 to building and construction workers is minuscule, given the cost of living in a city like the national capital.
The building and construction workers are, who are registered with the Delhi Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board, are entitled for a monthly pension of Rs. 3000 after completion of 60 years.
Title: PFIZER PRODUCTS INC. v. RENOVISION EXPORTS PVT. LTD. AND ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 529
The Delhi High Court has permanently restrained a homeopathic oil manufacturer from selling its products under the mark “Vigoura” after pharmaceutical company Pfizer accused it of infringing its registered trademark “Viagra” used for an erectile dysfunction allopathic drug.
Justice Sanjeev Narula observed that the trademark “Viagra” is highly recognized by its name in the sphere of erectile dysfunction drugs and has also acquired national and global repute.
Title: SHOAIB ALAM @ BOBBY v. STATE and other connected matters
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 530
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to three men, Shoaib Alam, Gulfam and Javed, accused in the murder case of Intelligence Bureau (IB) staffer Ankit Sharma during the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.
Justice Navin Chawla however dismissed the bail plea moved by other accused, Nazim, in the case.
Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL For Having 4-Yr LLB Course
Case Title: ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY v. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 531
The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a PIL seeking a direction on Centre to constitute a “Legal Education Commission” comprising of retired judges, law professors and lawyers to ascertain the feasibility of four years LLB course.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora remarked that it is not the court's domain to design courses and that the authorities will decide the issue.
Case Title: CIT verses Dabur India Ltd
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 532
The Delhi High Court dismisses Revenue's appeal against ITAT's order in case of Dabur India Ltd., while reiterating that for purpose of deduction u/s 80IB & 80IC of the Income tax Act, the only essential requisite is that the eligible industrial undertakings should be carrying out manufacture or production of articles or things.
Case Title: Shri Sita Ram & Others vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 533
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that implementation of revised pay scales involves executive discretion and courts do not have the authority to intervene unless there is evidence of illegality or a glaring irregularity.
The case involved allegations against the Municipal Corporation of Delhi for failure to implement an enhanced pay scale for its technicians, as recommended by the 5th Pay Commission. It was held that the petitioners (technicians) were not entitled to the enhanced pay scale since it couldn't be construed as a legally vested right.
Title: LAWYER'S VOICE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 534
The Delhi High Court on Thursday disposed of a public interest litigation (PIL) to curb circulation of deepfake videos during the ongoing Lok Sabha polls, observing that it cannot pass a direction in the middle of the elections and that the Election Commission of India (ECI) is not remediless and will act on the issue.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora disposed of the PIL filed by lawyers voice and asked the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation to the ECI during the course of the day.
Case Title: Remy Israni vs R. B. Seth Jessa Ram Hospital And Bros
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 535
The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee partially upheld the order of an Industrial Tribunal to allow a Worklady to submit additional documents along with her affidavit of evidence. The bench held that the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is a beneficial legislation where the strict timelines under the Commercial Courts Act or the CPC ought not to be applied.
Case Title:M/S Madras Trading Co Vs Ramjeet @ Ramajeet & Anr
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 536
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma held that Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, which provides for appeals against orders of compensation and other related matters, can only be exercised when the appeal involves a substantial question of law.
Title: SUNNY ALIAS RAVI KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHII
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 537
The Delhi High Court has observed that no wrongdoing can be attributed if two consenting adults indulge in consensual sexual activity, regardless of their marital status.
“While societal norms dictate that sexual relations should ideally occur within the confines of marriage, no wrongdoing can be attributed if consensual sexual activity occurs between two consenting adults, regardless of their marital status,” Justice Amit Mahajan said.
Title: SUNAYANA SIBAL & ORS. v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 538
The Delhi High Court has ordered action against the use of spurious Oxytocin hormone in dairy colonies in the national capital and directed that the cases registered be investigated by jurisdictional police stations.
A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora said that administering Oxytocin amounts to animal cruelty and is a cognizable offence under Section 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
Coal Scam: Delhi High Court Orders Renewal Of Ex-MP Vijay Darda's Passport For Three Years
Title: VIJAY DARDA v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 539
The Delhi High Court has ordered renewal of passport of former Rajya Sabha MP Vijay Darda, convicted in a coal scam case, for a period of three years.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that Darda was granted permission on past many occasions to travel abroad and he did not misused the liberty granted to him.
Case Title: National Highways Authority Of India Vs M/S Kcc Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 540
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh held that making allegations against the Arbitral Tribunal without any basis is contrary to the letter and spirit of the arbitral process.
Case Title: Feroz Ahmed Bhatt Vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 541
The Delhi High Court has declined parole to Feroz Ahmed Bhatt, a convicted terrorist who has served over two decades in prison and had applied for temporary release to travel to Jammu and Kashmir.
The court cited concerns that his presence in the region could pose a threat to broader security interests. Despite the convict's request for parole to visit his parents and marry, the court ruled against it. Instead, the court directed the jail superintendent to facilitate a one-time video call between Bhatt and his parents.
Case Name- Dr. Shashi Bhushan Vs. University of Delhi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 542
A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Dr. Shashi Bhushan Vs. University of Delhi has held that a candidate even in the final selection list does not have an indefeasible right to appointment.
Case Title: Kanchanjunga Building Employees Union Vs Kanchanjunga Flat Owner's Society & Anr
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 543
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that the onus of proof in establishing an employer-employee relationship rests with the party making such a claim. The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by certain Workmen hired on a contractual basis, who failed to establish a direct relationship with the Association they were working for.
Transfer, Being An Exigency Of Service, Is Neither A Matter Of Right Nor Choice: Delhi High Court
Case Name- Pawan Kumar Mathuri. vs UOI & Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 544
A Division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Saurabh Banerjee while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Pawan Kumar Mathuri. vs UOI & Ors. has held that transfer, being an exigency of service, is neither a matter of right nor a matter of choice.
Title: DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT v. AKHILESH SINGH & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 545
The Delhi High Court has ruled that once a person is discharged or acquitted from the scheduled offence, the properties attached under the PMLA cannot legally be treated as proceeds of crime or be viewed as property derived or obtained from criminal activity.
Cost Of Air Conditioning Services Provided In Schools Have To Be Borne By Parents: Delhi High Court
Title: MANISH GOEL v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 546
The Delhi High Court has observed that the cost of air conditioning services provided to children in schools have to be borne by the parents.
Case Name- AIIMS vs Ashok Kumar
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 547
A single bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of AIIMS vs Ashok Kumar has held that when the termination is found to be illegal, grant of reinstatement with full back wages has to be provided as per the facts and circumstances of each case and shall not be awarded mechanically.
Title: ASHOK KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 548
The Delhi High Court has observed that if the provision of furlough is bound by rigid and mechanical interpretations of the Prison Rules, it will lose its true purpose and shine.
Case Title: Right Choice Marketing Solutions Jlt & Ors Vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 549
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that where a "foreign cheque" is deposited for encashment in India, the Court within whose jurisdiction it is so deposited shall have the jurisdiction to adjudicate on the complaint for its dishonour under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act).
Case Name- Commissioner of Police & Ors vs Sant Ram
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 550
A division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Commissioner of Police & Ors vs Sant Ram has held that enquiry cannot be dispensed with only on the basis of a perceived notion that the accused being a police personnel would threaten the witnesses and holding of an enquiry would cause trauma to the complainant
NewsClick UAPA Case: Delhi High Court Orders Release Of Approver Amit Chakraborty
Title: Amit Chakraborty v. State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 551
The Delhi High Court has ordered release of NewsClick Human Resources head Amit Chakraborty seeking bail after turning approver in the UAPA case registered following allegations of the portal receiving money for pro-China propaganda.
Title: AMMAR ABDUL RAHIMAN v. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 552
While granting bail to an accused in a UAPA case, the Delhi High Court has said that merely because his mobile was found carrying incriminating material like “photographs of terrorist Osama Bin Laden, Jihad Promotion and ISIS flags” and he was accessing lectures of “hard-liner or Muslim preachers” would not be enough to brand him as a member of a banned terrorist organization like ISIS.
Title: KAMLESH DEVI v. STATE OF DELHI NCT & ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 553
The Delhi High Court has observed that minors must also be taught about “virtual touch” and not just traditional concepts of “good and bad touch”, and said that the ”emerging concept” must be included in their curriculum.
Case Title: Global Vectra Helicorp Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 554
The Delhi High Court has held that the income tax department should allow personal hearings through the national faceless assessment centre on the assessee's request.
Title: ANKIT MISHRA & ANR. v. SANTOSH SHARMA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 555
The Delhi High Court has imposed Rs. 1 lakh costs on a man who made “Lord Hanuman” a party objector (appellant) to an appeal concerning the dispute of a temple constructed on a private land and claiming the right to worship therein.
Title: PRITPAL SINGH v. STATE
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 556
While quashing an FIR registered against a man under the Arms Act, 1959, the Delhi High Court has asked him to pay costs of Rs. 50,000 to be deposited with Delhi Police Welfare Fund and three district court Bar Associations.
Title: SONU @ SUNIL v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 557
The Delhi High Court has recently observed that Courts are persuaded to save lives of an accused, rather than to make him undergo trial and punishment, in cases where children, who are about to attain the age of majority, commit acts in the name of love amounting to offence under various enactments, including POCSO Act.
Case Name- Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors vs Virender
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 558
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors vs Virender has held that a termination order which is based on the report of an inquiry in which misconduct of a definite nature was arrived at behind the back of the officer is violative of principles of natural justice.
Case Title: E-EIGHTEEN.COM LTD vs KRISHNAA @ JAGTAR SINGH & ORS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 559
The Delhi High Court has issued an ex-parte ad-interim injunction order in favor of E-Eighteen.com Ltd, a subsidiary of the Network18 group, in a trademark dispute suit.
Case Title: The Executive Engineer & Ors. Vs M/S Bholasingh Jaiprakash Construction Ltd. & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 560
The Delhi High Court division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held that the proper recourse against proceedings under the MSMED Act is to file an application under Section 18(3) of the MSMED Act or Section 16 of the Arbitration Act. Further, the bench held that in case an award has been passed, then the proper recourse is to file objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
Case Title: International Avenue Vs Delhi Transport Corporation
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 561
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh has directed International Avenue to deposit Rs. 5 crores within one week considering the substantial amount due under the arbitral award. The bench held that despite providing multiple opportunities to the company, it failed to comply with the order. It held that this constituted contempt of court.
Title: MAXWELL PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGD v. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD AND ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 562
The Delhi High Court has observed that effective participation of organisations which have a public character in pre-litigation mediation is essential.
Title: H v. THE UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 563
The Delhi High Court has refused to permit a 20 year old unmarried woman, preparing for NEET Examination, to medically terminate her ongoing pregnancy of 27 weeks, observing that the foetus was healthy and viable.
Title: SHRIKANT PRASAD v. GOVT OF N.C.T OF DELHI AND ORS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 564
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking to restrain the media houses from creating “pressure and airing sensational headlines” regarding Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's resignation and imposition of President Rule in the national capital.
Case Title: SBI Cards And Payment Services Private Limited Vs Kony Inc. & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 565
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh granted ex-parte ad-interim injunction to SBI Cards under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to ensure access to and operation of certain licensed software. The bench directed the Respondents from taking any action or steps, which would result in the disruption in the credit card services of SBI Cards. through the use of the licensed software.
Title: SANJAY RAGHUNATH PIPLANI AND ANR. v. NATIONAL BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION DELHI AND ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 566
The Delhi High Court has directed the National Buildings Construction Corporation (NBCC) to return entire amount of over Rs. 76 lakh deposited by a homebuyer in 2017 regarding a flat which was never handed over to him, observing that he had been left in complete lurch.
Delhi High Court Restrains Real Estate Company From Unauthorisedly Using Taj's Vivanta Trademark
Title: THE INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LIMITED v. SHIVGYAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 567
The Delhi High Court has restrained a real estate company offering luxury flats and accommodations from unauthorisedly using “Vivanta” mark in a trademark infringement suit filed by The Indian Hotels Company which owns hospitality brand 'Taj'.
Difficulty In Collating Information No Ground To Deny Information Under RTI Act: Delhi High Court
Title: GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. v. MR PRABHJOT SINGH DHILLON
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 568
The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that difficulty in collating the information is not a ground to deny information under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Title: Microsoft, Google v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 569
The Delhi High Court has asked Microsoft and Google to approach a single judge by filing review of its last year ruling directing them to automatically identify and remove “non-consensual intimate images” on the internet without insisting on specific URLs.
Title: SONU SONKAR v. THE LT GOVERNOR, DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 570
The Delhi High Court has observed that the law in India as well as the Delhi Prison Rules do not permit grant of parole to a convict on the ground of maintaining conjugal relationships with a live-in partner, when he already has a legally wedded wife.
Title: SANJAY GOEL v. MAJESTIC BUILDCON PVT. LTD.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 571
The Delhi High Court has observed that an order of transferring a case to another court may mar the career of the judicial officer for life and thus, such a step must not ordinarily be resorted to.
Title: SANJAY KANSAL v. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 572
The Delhi High Court has observed that the evidence sought to be given at the instance of an accused who becomes an approver and is granted pardon in the scheduled or predicate offence, cannot be used for the purposes of money laundering proceedings under the PMLA.
Title: THE INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LIMITED v. JOHN DOE AND OTHERS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 573
The Delhi High Court has passed a John Doe order in favour of Indian Hotels Company, part of the TATA group of companies, by restraining various “unknown fraudulent websites” using its registered trademark “Ginger” unauthorisedly for hotel bookings.
Delhi High Court Quashes MOOWR Instructions Denying Benefit To Solar Power Generation Units
Case Title: Acme Heergarh Powertech Private Limited Versus CBIC
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 574
The Delhi High Court has held that the statutory scheme underlying the Manufacture and Other Operations in Warehouse Regulations, 2019 (MOOWR) cannot be construed as seeking to exclude solar power generation in terms of permissions granted under Section 65 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Case Title: Zenith Leisure Holidays Ltd. Vs Union Of India & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 575
In a recent ruling, the Delhi Court has upheld the decision of the Ministry of Railways to keep the empanelment of Zenith Leisure Holidays Ltd. which provides catering and back-end services to the Indian Railways in abeyance following an incident where the firm was found to have carried LPG cylinders on board trains despite directives against flame-based cooking in pantry cars.
Title: TULIR CHARITABLE TRUST v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 576
Exercising its suo moto revisional jurisdiction, the Delhi High Court registered a suo moto revision petition from a public interest litigation which challenged a trial court order discharging two men accused of circulating and storing child pornographic material.
Case Title: Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd Vs Govt Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 577
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held the dispute resolution clauses are considered sacrosanct and cannot be disregarded. Nonetheless, it held the clauses must be read in a pragmatic manner and not in a manner that frustrates the purpose.
Case Title: VI Exports India Private Limited Versus Union Of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 578
The Delhi High Court while dismissing the rice exporter's appeal, upheld the decision of the single bench holding that the exporter cannot be permitted to export 11,000 MT of banned non- basmati white rice, due to the non-fulfilment of the conditions entitling it to an exemption from the ban on export imposed by Notification bearing no. 20/2023 dated 20th July, 2023 issued by the Department of Commerce, Government of India.
Condition Of Pre-Deposit Duly Complied, Delhi High Court Restores Appeal On Board Of CESTAT
Case Title: Ankit Madan Versus Registrar, Customs, Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 579
The Delhi High Court has held that the appeal itself may be restored on the Board of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), bearing in mind the undisputed position that the condition of pre-deposit has been duly complied with.
Delhi High Court Stays Felling Of Trees In Central Ridge, Orders Removal Of Garbage
Title: ANJALI COLLEGE OF PHARMACY AND SCIENCE THROUGH ITS FOUNDER -CUM-CHAIRMAN DEVENDRA GUPTA v. DR. MONTU M. PATEL PRESIDENT PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 580
The Delhi High Court has directed that no further felling of trees or removal of shrubs and other bushes shall take place in the Central Ridge in the national capital, without the permission of the Court.
The court has also directed the Forest Department and other local authorities to ensure that no dumping of garbage or any other waste material is carried out in the Central Ridge.
Title: Shaheen Abdulla & Ors. v. Election Commission of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 581
The Delhi High Court rejected a plea seeking immediate action against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other candidates for delivering allegedly “communally divisive speeches” in violation of the Model Code of Conduct amid the Lok Sabha polls.
Justice Sachin Datta rejected the plea observing that the same is wholly misconceived.
Case Title: Jasmine Kaur Chhabra v. UOI & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 582
The Delhi Government has informed the Delhi High Court that 143 separate public toilets have been constructed in the national capital for transgender persons.
The court is also informed that the construction of 223 public toilets for transgender persons is in process and the same is yet to start for 30 more toilets.
Show Cause Notice Not Adjudicated For Nearly 14 Years; Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Dept.
Case Title: M/S Durga Trading Company And Ors Versus The Additional Director General (Adjudication) And Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 583
A division bench of the Delhi High Court, comprising Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Ravinder Dudeja, has issued the notice to the department in a petition assailing the jurisdiction to adjudicate the Show Cause Notice, which has not been adjudicated for nearly 14 years.
The petitioner/assessee is a manufacturer of Pan Masala containing tobacco commonly known as Gutkha, commercially engaging under the brand name "Pukar.”
AO Can't Proceed With Assessment In Absence Of Section 127 Transfer Order: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Rajsheela Growth Fund (P) Ltd. Versus ITO
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 584
The Delhi High Court has held that the Assessing Officer cannot proceed with assessment in the absence of a transfer order under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act.
The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has observed that once the case of the assessee is centralized, then the transfer of the case of the assessee to another AO would not be permissible without a decentralization order or transfer order under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, as contrary to such a position outside the underlying objective that the Act seeks to achieve by virtue of powers enshrined under Section 127.
Title: STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION AUTHORITY OF INDIA, & ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 585
The Delhi High Court has recently directed the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to provide to the Delhi Police all information pertaining to a “forged Aadhar card”, recovered from a man accused of supplying fake currency notes, for verifying it with the Aadhar data bank.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri allowed Delhi Police's plea seeking verification of the forged Aadhar card with the database, after the details did not match with the accused when checked on the UIDAI website.
Title: SARVESH v. ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 586
The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Government's Chief Secretary to ensure implementation of the recommendations given by a seven member Committee constituted by the court to streamline the process of availing free medical treatment under various government schemes in the hospitals in the national capital.
Delhi High Court Issues Directions To Maintain Hygiene In Dairies, Medical Care Of Cattle
Title: SUNAYANA SIBAL & ORS. v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 587
The Delhi High Court has recently issued a slew of directions for maintaining hygiene in dairies in the national capital, to ensure medical care of cattle kept therein and for use of spurious oxytocin.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Ps Arora was prima facie not persuaded by the submission of the Delhi Government's Chief Secretary that the cattle in the dairies adjoining sanitary landfill sites in Delhi can be prevented from eating hazardous waste until 2025-26.
Title: BEIERSDORF AG v. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 588
The Delhi High Court has restrained Hindustan Unilever Limited from engaging in marketing or advertising activity of comparing its 'Ponds' products with 'Nivea' products, either expressly or by implication or association, through sale representatives in various malls in the national capital and Gurugram.
Title: CENTRE FOR POLICY RESEARCH v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 14, DELHI & ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 589
The Delhi High Court has recently directed the Assessing Officer (AO) to decide afresh the application moved by the Indian public policy think tank Centre for Policy Research (CPR) seeking a stay of the income tax demand for the year 2022-23.
A division bench comprising of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav set aside the Assessing Officer's order passed on May 03 disposing of CPR's application for stay of the demand, while requiring the think tank to deposit 20% of the outstanding demand as a pre-condition for granting protection.
Delhi High Court Reverses Acquittal, Holds Father Guilty Of Repeatedly Raping Minor Daughter
Title: State v. PDD and other connected matters
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 590
The Delhi High Court has reversed the acquittal of a man and held him guilty for repeatedly raping and sexually assaulting his minor daughter for around two years in 2011-13.
The man was acquitted by the trial court in June 2019. The FIR was registered on January 2013 on the basis of the victim's statement alleging that she was being assaulted by him for the last two years- 2011. The last incident of sexual assault was reported to be on January 04, 2013.
Case Title: Mercator Ltd. Vs Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd And Connected Matters
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 591
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prateek Jalan held that the public policy argument while considering enforcement of foreign awards has to be construed narrowly and in consonance with international notions of public policy. The bench held that all violations of statute or supporting legislation do not satisfy this ground, and violations must be of fundamental policies considered shocking to the conscience of the Court.
Case Title: Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 592
The Delhi High Court has deleted the addition for unexplained expenditure, which was based on the instruction issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).
“Merely proceeding on the basis that CBIC is an apex body and therefore, information provided by it cannot be doubted, without even identifying or meaningfully analyzing such information, is wholly insufficient to proceed to make an addition,” the bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju observed.
Monetary Limit Of Rs. 1 Crore For Appeals To High Court; Delhi High Court Dismisses Dept's Appeal
Case Title: The Principal Commissioner Of Customs, ACC Imports New Delhi Versus M/S. Salasar Synthetics
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 593
The Delhi High Court has dismissed the challenging redemption fine of Rs. 40 lakhs, citing instructions issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), which set the monetary limit of Rs. 1 crore for appeals to the high court.
Case Title: Tipping Mr Pink Private Limited Vs Tipping Mr Pink Private Limited
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 594
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula granted an ex-parte interim injunction in favor of Tipping Mr Pink Private Limited to prevent Savera Eats from using the “Burger Singh” registered trademark. The bench held that despite the termination of the franchise agreement, Savera Eats continued to operate the franchise outlet under the Petitioner's registered trademark “Burger Singh”.
Case Title: Deepak Maurya Vs Saraswathi Supari Processing Unit & Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 595
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that the Court is not required to behave in a mechanical manner to send a party's dispute to the arbitral tribunal and must consider the fundamental issues, within the parameters outlined in Section 11(6-A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Delhi High Court Rules In Favour Of Karim's In Trademark Lawsuit Against Karin's
Title: KARIM HOTELS PVT LTD & ANR v. NIZAMUDDIN & ANR
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 596
The Delhi High Court has recently ruled in favour of Karim Hotels in its trademark infringement suit against a restaurant operated under the name Karin's.
Justice Sanjeev Narula decreed the suit in favour of Karim Hotels Private Limited and Karim's Mughlai Foods, which was accorded a license by the former authorising it to use “KARIM'S” trademark for commercial exploitation in relation to restaurant services.
Case Title: Delhi Tourism And Transportation Development Corporation Vs M/S Satinder Mahajan
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 597
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prateek Jalan held that the seat of the arbitration proceedings is to be determined on the basis of connection with the arbitral proceedings, and not with the cause of action for the underlying disputes.
Case Title: Mercator Ltd. Vs Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd And Connected Matters
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 598
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prateek Jalan held that enforcement of foreign awards should not be declined on grounds relating to the composition of the tribunal, which could have been raised before the Tribunal and before the seat Court, but were not so raised. It held that the judgment debtor did not object, even at the stage of appointment, on this ground.
Unexplained Expenditure Addition Merely Based On CBIC Instruction Not Sustainable: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 599
The Delhi High Court has deleted the addition for unexplained expenditure, which was based on the instruction issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).
Title: SANJEEV KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 600
The Delhi High Court has initiated suo moto criminal contempt case against a lawyer who made personal remarks on judges and posted contemptuous comments in the chat box while appearing through virtual mode during proceedings.
“Petitioner appears to have taken a wrong end of law, aggrieved against adverse orders passed by the Judicial Officers of the District Courts as well as this Court and cannot be permitted to cross the red line, thereby making personal attack on the Judges which undermines the integrity of the Institution,” Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta said.
Case Title: Rachita Francis Xavier v Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 601
The Delhi High Court recently ordered the Central government to confer citizenship upon a 17-year-old girl who was born and raised in India to parents holding Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) status but were citizens of the United States at the time of her birth.
Title: JAIKISHAN KAKUBHAI SARAF ALIAS JACKIE SHROFF v. THE PEPPY STORE & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 602
The Delhi High Court has recently restrained various entities from infringing the personality and publicity rights of Bollywood actor Jackie Shroff.
Justice Sanjeev Narula passed an interim injunction order in favour of the actor in his suit seeking protection of his personality rights.
Delhi High Court Dismisses Relaxo's Plea Against HRX's Use Of 'X' Mark In Trademark For Footwear
Case Title: Relaxo Footwears Limited v XS Brands Consultancy Private Limited & Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 603
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea by leading footwear manufacturer Relaxo, which sought to prevent HRX from using the 'X' mark in its trademark for selling footwear.
Justice Anish Dayal, presiding over the case, denied the interim injunction application filed by Relaxo. He rejected Relaxo's claim that the 'X' used by HRX appeared deceptively similar to the 'X' used by Relaxo's Sparx brand of footwear.
Delhi High Court Orders ₹30 Lakh Compensation To Kin Of Three Deceased Manual Scavengers
Title: REKHA AND ORS v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 604
The Delhi High Court has ordered compensation of Rs. 30 lakh each to the kin of three manual scavengers who died while cleaning a drain in 2017.
Justice Sachin Datta directed the city authorities to pay the amount to the families within eight weeks.
Delhi High Court Orders SpiceJet To Handover Leased Aircrafts With Engines To TWC Aviation
Title: TWC AVIATION CAPITAL LIMITED v. SPICEJET LIMITED
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 605
The Delhi High Court has recently ordered SpiceJet to handover two Boeing Aircrafts with engines to TWC Aviation over unpaid dues.
Delhi High Court Rejects PIL To Mandate Medical Professionals To Specify Risks Associated With Drugs
Title: JACOB VADAKKANCHERY v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 606
The Delhi High Court has rejected a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking to mandate all medical professionals practicing in the country to specify to a patient, along with the prescription, all kinds of possible risks and side effects associated with a drug or a pharmaceutical product being prescribed.
Delhi High Court Rejects Pleas Seeking Issuance Of Guidelines To Cap Airfares For Private Airlines
Title: AMIT SAHNI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. and other connected matter
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 607
The Delhi High Court has dismissed public interest litigations (PILs) seeking the issuance of guidelines for putting a cap on airfares in order to prevent private airlines from charging arbitrary, irrational and exorbitant airfares for flights.
Title: We, the People of India v. Union of India and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 608
The Delhi High Court has waived Rs. 75,000 costs imposed on a law student who filed a PIL seeking release of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on “extra ordinary interim bail” in all the criminal cases registered by against him.
Title: MOUNTAIN VALLEY SPRINGS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED v. BABY FOREST AYURVEDA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S LANDSMILL HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED) & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 609
The Delhi High Court has dismissed the interim injunction plea filed by skincare and cosmetics brand Forest Essentials seeking to restrain another brand from using the marks “Baby Forest” and “Baby Forest- Soham of Ayurveda” while selling baby care products.
Title: BILAL AHMAD MIR ALIAS BILAL MIR ALIAS BILLA v. NATIONAL INVESTIGATING AGENCY NEW DELHI and other connected matters
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 610
Citing Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoyevsky's quote from the book “Crime and Punishment”, the Delhi High Court has modified and reduced the sentence awarded to five members of terror organisation Jaish-e-Mohammed(JeM) from life imprisonment to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 121A of Indian Penal Code.
Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Accused In NSCN (IM) Terror Funding Case
Case Title: Masasasong Ao Vs National Iinvestigation Agency
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 611
The Delhi High Court has upheld the denial of bail to Masasosang Ao, the second accused in the terror funding case related to Naga insurgent group National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isak Muivah (NSCN (IM)).
Case Title: Ajay Singh and Anr vs Kal Airways Private Limited & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 612
The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Ravinder Dudeja set aside a Single-judge decision that upheld an arbitral tribunal's decision requiring the cash-strapped SpiceJet and its chairman, Ajay Singh, to refund ₹ 270 crore plus interest to media baron Kalanithi Maran and his company, KAL Airways.
Case Title: PT Bukaka Teknik Utama Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax (IT), Delhi - 2
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 613
The Delhi High Court has held that the assessee can't be obstructed from availing of the benefits of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV Act) even where the time limit for an appeal has not expired.
Title: UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS PRODUCTIONS LLLP & ORS. v. MOVIES123.LA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 614
The Delhi High Court has recently granted a dynamic+ injunction in favour of Netflix, Universal City Studios, Disney and various other global entertainment companies to protect their copyrighted works in a suit filed against 26 rogue websites.
Title: Manish Sisodia v. ED, CBI
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 615
The Delhi High Court has denied bail to Former Deputy Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party leader Manish Sisodia in the money laundering and corruption cases related to the alleged liquor policy scam.
Case Title: Dollar Gulati Vs PCIT and Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 616
The Delhi High Court refuses to interfere with the order of the AO passed u/s 127 where the case of the Taxpayer was centralized and transferred from Income-tax Officer (ITO), Delhi to Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (DCIT), Central Circle, Haryana.
Additions U/s 69C Based Merely On CBIC Information Can't Be Sustained: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Bausch And Lomb India Private Limited Vs Assessment Unit
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 617
The Delhi High Court sets aside the assessment order and remits the matter to AO on the ground that the additions of Rs.70.10 Cr. made under Section 69C as unexplained expenditure based merely on information received from Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC) is unsustainable.
Title: AMAR SINGH BHATIA & ANR. v. SIR GANGA RAM HOSPITAL & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 618
The Delhi High Court has ordered that the donor or recipient be informed via WhatsApp or email about the deficiencies in the documentation pertaining to organ transplantation process.
Title: CHHAVI v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 619
The Delhi High Court has observed that the Centenary Chance exams offered by the Delhi University, allowing ex-students a second chance to repeat the papers which they are yet to clear and earn degrees, are a not a matter of right.
Case Title: Vishal Dhiren Shah Vs Union Of India, Through Ministry Of Corporate Affairs & Anr. And Connected Matters
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 620
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma dismissed an interim application filed against the decision of the National Financial Reporting Authority which imposed penalties on CAs and audit firm for lapses in the audit of Reliance Capital Limited for the FY 2018-19.
Delhi High Court Permits Former BharatPe MD Ashneer Grover, Wife To Travel Abroad
Title: Ashneer Grover v. Union of India & Ors. and other connected matter
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 621
The Delhi High Court has allowed Former BharatPe Managing Director Ashneer Grover and his wife Madhuri Jain Grover to travel abroad to the United States.
Delhi High Court Quashes Appointment Of Prof. Eqbal Hussain As Jamia Pro-Vice Chancellor
Title: MD SHAMI AHMAD ANSARI & ANR v. JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA & ORS and other connected matters
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 622
The Delhi High Court has quashed the appointment of Prof. Eqbal Hussain as the Pro Vice Chancellor and consequently as the Officiating Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia Office.
Title: SUDHA PRASAD v. UDAY PAL SINGH
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 623
The Delhi High Court has recently held a man guilty of criminal contempt of court for posting a video on social media defaming the judges and claiming that they were doing “illegal acts.”
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. RANJEET SINGH MALHOTRA
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 624
While discharging a lawyer who was suffering from “acute behavioural issues” in a suo moto criminal contempt case, the Delhi High Court has asked the Bar Council of Delhi to assess whether he is fit to continue in the legal profession.
Delhi High Court Issues Directions For Sale Of Used And Refurbished Hard Disk Drives
Case Title: Seagate Technology LLC v Daichi International & connected matters
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 625
The Delhi High Court has recently issued a set of directions for the sale of used and refurbished hard disk drives (HDDs).
Case Name : Kishore Kumar Makwana vs Union Of India & Anr
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 627
A division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee while deciding a writ petition, in case of Kishore Kumar Makwana vs Union Of India & Anr held that employee reverted from an ad hoc promotion can have their pay reduced, but terminal benefits should reflect higher salary received during long period of ad hoc service.
Title: RAJASTHAN EQUESTRAIN ASSOCIATION v. EQUESTRIAN FEDERATION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 628
The Delhi High Court has appointed its retired judge, Justice Najmi Waziri, as the Chairperson of ad-hoc Administrative Committee constituted to supervise the administration of the Equestrian Federation of India (EFI).
Title: VASU SACHDEVA v. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 629
The Delhi High Court has refused to direct the Bar Council of India (BCI) to treat the degree of a law graduate from the University of Hertfordshire in the United Kingdom as equivalent to an undergraduate course in India.
Case Title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -15 Versus Shiv Kumar Nayyar
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 630
The Delhi High Court has held that a grant of approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot be merely a ritualistic formality or rubber stamping by the authority; rather, it must reflect an appropriate application of mind.
Case Title: Akshay Choudhary Vs Union Of India Ministry Of Home Affairs & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 631
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Ravinder Dudeja has directed a re-examination of a CAPF candidate who was declared unfit even after tattoo removal surgery. It held that the Review Medical Board should not have examined the candidate immediately after a few days of surgery and should have given sufficient time to him to ensure the healing of the scar.
Case Title: Delhivery Limited Vs. Far Left Retail Private Limited
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 632
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that objection regarding the insufficiency of service is considered to be on merits and therefore should be raised before the Arbitrator.
Case Title: New Delhi Television Limited Versus Dispute Resolution Panel 2 & Anr
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 633
The Delhi High Court has held that once the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) had proceeded to pass the order of October 17, 2017, all that the AO was obliged to do was pass an assessment order in accordance with the procedure prescribed in Section 92CA(4) of the Income Tax Act.
Title: VLS FINANCE LTD v. STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 634
The Delhi High Court has observed that the right to be heard given to a victim or complainant in a criminal case cannot be uplifted to a right to be impleaded in a criminal revision.
Title: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGTATION v. R. VASUDEVAN & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 635
The Delhi High Court has observed that there cannot be piecemeal disclosure of material on which the prosecution seeks to base its case.
Case Title: Shantanu Prakash Vs State Bank Of India & Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 636
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna held that the concerned party must be provided with all requisite documents that form the basis of Show Cause Notices (SCNs) by the banks. It held that this enables the party to submit a proper reply and address all allegations effectively. Without access to these underlying documents, the procedure of issuing an SCN and filing a response would be rendered meaningless.
Winding Up Proceedings On Nascent Stage , To Be Transferred To NCLT: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Arabian Oilfield Suppliers & Services Vs Greka Drilling (India) Limited
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 637
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma held that winding up proceedings pending before High Courts, which are at a nascent stage and have not progressed to an advanced stage, ought to be transferred to the NCLT.
Title: MUNNA SINGH & ANR. v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 638
The Delhi High Court has called for the sensitization of all the judges of trial courts in the national capital to pronounce their judgments on conviction only when the order is ready and immediately provide a copy to the accused who has to be taken into custody.
Justice Navin Chawla directed that the order be circulated to the Principal District and Sessions judges of all the District Courts in Delhi.
Delhi High Court Restricts Ramleela Function Bookings In DDA Grounds Till Fresh SOP Is Published
Title: SHREE HANUMANT DHARMIK RAMLEELA COMMITTEE REGD & ANR. v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 639
The Delhi High Court has barred any further offline or online bookings of Ramleela functions in the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) grounds till a new SOP aur guidelines for booking is published by the authority.
Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju directed the DDA to formulate comprehensive SOPs or guidelines for booking of Ramleela sites within five weeks' and no later than June 25.
Title: SHRIKANT PRASAD v. GOVT OF N.C.T OF DELHI AND ORS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 640
The Delhi High Court has waived Rs. 1 lakh costs imposed on a lawyer who filed public interest litigation to restrain the media houses from creating “pressure and airing sensational headlines” regarding Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's resignation and imposition of President Rule in the national capital.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora directed the petitioner, Shrikant Prasad, to do community service in accordance with the directions of the DSLSA.
Title: SpiceJet v. TWC Aviation
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 641
The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with a single judge's order directing airline SpiceJet to handover two Boeing Aircrafts with engines to TWC Aviation over unpaid dues.
A division bench comprising of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Amit Bansal however directed SpiceJet to return the aircrafts and engines to the lessor by June 17.
Title: BHAVREEN KANDHARI v. SHRI C. D. SINGH AND ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 642
The Delhi High Court has appointed Delhi Government's Chief Secretary as the nodal authority to draft the procedure for preventing felling or transplantation of trees in the North Campus, Delhi University for its expansion or development of infrastructure.
Justice Jasmeet Singh asked the Chief Secretary to would call all the stakeholders, including the Delhi Urban Art Commission (DUAC), Amici Curiae (Advocates Aditya N. Prasad, Gautam Narayan and Prabhsahay Kaur), the municipal authorities and any other agency necessary in his opinion.
Title: YAMIN ALI v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 643
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the appointment of Administrator of Delhi Waqf Board with costs of Rs. 10,000.
Justice Subramonium Prasad said that the plea was an absolute abuse of the process of law without giving any valid reasons as to why the appointment should be quashed.
Title: REKHA OBEROI v. AMIT OBEROI
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 644
The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that Section 15(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, unfortunately, works against the widow of a pre-deceased son, while it is intended to benefit another woman being a deceased woman.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said that the provision, which provides general rules of succession of property of a female Hindu dying intestate, is an anomaly in the legislation which needs rectification.
Title: ABOOBACKER E. v. National Investigation Agency
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 645
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed the plea moved by E Abubacker, former chairman of Popular Front of India (PFI), seeking bail in the UAPA case being probed by the National Investigation Agency.
A division bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain dismissed the appeal moved by Abubacker who sought bail on the merits as well as medical grounds.
Title: ED v. Ajay S Mittal
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 646
The Delhi High Court has set aside a trial court order transferring Bhushan Steel money laundering case from one judge to another, after one of the accused alleged that the judge passed a comment expressing "ED matters me kaun si bail hoti hai?”
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that the alleged comment did not reflect any apprehension of bias against the accused or something in favour of the prosecuting agency.
Forums Under Senior Citizens Act Can't Decide Question Of Property Title: Delhi High Court
Title: MANJU TOKAS & ANR v. GNCT OF DELHI THROUGH DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 647
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the forums under the Senior Citizens Act cannot decide question of title of properties.
“A reading of the Act makes it clear that the forum under the Act do not have the jurisdiction to decide the title of the property and the purpose of the Act is maintenance of the Senior Citizen and to ensure their welfare. The question of title, therefore, cannot be decided by forums under the Senior Citizens Act,” Justice Subramonium Prasad said.
Delhi High Court Grants Statutory Bail To Sharjeel Imam In Sedition Case
Title: Sharjeel Imam v. State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 648
The Delhi High Court has granted statutory bail to Sharjeel Imam in a UAPA and sedition case relating to the alleged inflammatory speeches made by him in Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia area in the national capital against the Citizenship Amendment Act.
A division bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain allowed Imam's bail plea. He had challenged the trial court order denying him statutory bail in the case.
Title: PRACHEEN SHIV MANDIR AVAM AKHADA SAMITI v. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AND ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 649
The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea against the action of Delhi Development Authority (DDA) demolishing the Pracheen Shiv Mandir situated near city's Geeta Colony and located near Yamuna Flood Plains.
Justice Dharmesh Sharma observed that Pracheen Shiv Mandir Avam Akhada Samiti, which filed the plea, miserably failed to demonstrate any legal rights existing with it so as to continue to use and occupy the civic property for running the temple services.
Title: CAPTAIN DEEPAK KUMAR v. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 650
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Narendra Modi from contesting the 2024 general elections.
Justice Sachin Datta rejected the plea filed by Captain Deepak Kumar alleging that Modi and his accomplices attempted to destabilize the national security by planning a fatal crash of an Air India flight in 2018 where he was pilot. Kumar also said Modi "made a false Oath or affirmation which otherwise must be made after the nomination paper has been submitted to RO."
Case Title: Dr. Satendra Singh Vas Union Of India & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 651
The Delhi High Court has directed the Indian Nursing Council (INC) to address a representation challenging Clause 8 of the 'Admission Terms and Conditions' under the Revised Regulations and Curriculum for B.Sc. (Nursing Program) Regulations, 2020.
The court has ordered that the current writ petition be treated as a formal representation to INC, which must decide on the matter in accordance with the law, preferably within four weeks.
Case Title: Purvanchal Hathkargha Sahakari Sangh Ltd Vs All India Handloom Fabrics Society And Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 652
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that except power conferred to the Central Registrar under Section 84 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 for appointment of an Arbitrator, the other provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 shall remain in operation. It held that the notice as required under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 would be a pre-requisite even for initiation of proceedings under Section 84 of the Multi State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002.
Case Title: Extramarks Education India Pvt. Ltd Vs Saraswati Shishu Mandir
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 653
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh held that that the termination of an arbitrator's mandate does not equate to the termination of the arbitral proceedings. Instead, it allows for the appointment of a substitute arbitrator to ensure the continuation of the proceedings.
Case Title: M/S Power Mech Projects Ltd Vs M/S Doosan Power Systems India Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 654
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh held the court is fully empowered to extend the mandate, even after the expiry of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Title: CA RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA v. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 655
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea seeking details about the reason for recommendation for High Court judges appointment remitted by Collegium of the Supreme Court of India to the High Court Collegium.
Justice Subramonium Prasad rejected the plea moved by CA Rakesh Kumar Gupta and imposed Rs. 25,000 costs on him to be deposited with the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund.
Case Title: Abhimanyu Through Special Power Of Attorney Holder Vs Parmesh Construction Co. Ltd
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 656
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that where the arbitration seat is fixed, only such court shall have exclusive jurisdiction. It held that the cause of action arose at Noida, the agreement was executed at Noida, and the suit property is also situated at Noida. Therefore, the courts in Noida have jurisdiction over the appointment of an arbitrator.
Bank Can't Open LOC As An Arm Twisting Tactic To Recover Debt: Delhi High Court
Title: RAJESH KUMAR MEHTA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 657
The Delhi High Court has recently observed that a Bank cannot open a Lookout Circular (LOC) as an arm-twisting tactic to recover debt from an individual.
“This Court is of the opinion that after resorting to all the remedies available in law, the Bank cannot open a Lookout Circular as an arm-twisting tactic to recover debt from a person who is otherwise unable to pay more so when there are no allegations that he was engaged in any fraud or in any siphoning off or defalcation of the amounts given as loan,” Justice Subramonium Prasad said.
Case Title: M/S Blooming Orchid Vs Fp Life Education Foundation
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 658
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held the period during which the parties were bona fide negotiating towards an amicable settlement may be excluded for the purpose of computing the period of limitation for reference to Arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Title: DELHI TAMIL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION v. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ORS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 659
The Delhi High Court has ruled that aided minority institutions have an absolute right to appoint the Principals, teachers and other staff in the educational institutions run by them.
“The grant of aid, by the State, to the minority institution, makes no substantial difference to this legal position. At the highest, the State can regulate the proper utilization of the aid which it grants. It cannot subjugate the minority educational institution to its dictates in the matter of appointment of teachers, or Principals, on the pretext that it has granted aid to the institution,” Justice C Hari Shankar said.
Case Title: Communication Component Antenna Inc v. Mobi Antenna Technologies
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 660
The Delhi High Court has awarded ₹217 crore in lost profits damages to Communication Component Antenna Inc (CCAI) in a patent infringement case against Mobi Antenna Technologies.
Title: SANSER PAL SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 661
The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) to stop the media from disclosing the name of AAP Rajya Sabha MP Swati Maliwal while reporting the assault case filed by her, along with contents of the FIR.
Frame Rules To Levy Charges On Those Encroaching On Public Land: Delhi High Court To DDA, MCD
Title: KAMLESH JAIN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 662
The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to devise a mechanism or frame rules to levy charges on those encroaching upon public land.
Delhi High Court Quashes Forgery Case Filed by Anchor Health Against Colgate-Palmolive
Case Title: Colgate Palmolive Company & Ors v State of NCT & Anr & Connected matters
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 663
The Delhi High Court has quashed a forgery case filed by Anchor Health and Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. against Colgate-Palmolive Company and its directors.
The case, involving allegations of forgery related to trademark registration documents, was reserved on February 28, 2024, and dismissed by Justice Amit Sharma on May 28, 2024.
Case Title: Jaipuria Edutech Foundation vs. Shyamlalbabu Educational Trust
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 664
The Delhi High Court restrained the Defendant and all those acting for or / and on their behalf, from using plaintiffs' trademarks in respect of 'Jaipuria International Schools', 'Seth MR. Jaipuria School', as well as the device mark which is deceptively similar to plaintiffs' marks in respect of school or any other educational services.
Case Title: Sanjay Khatri vs. State of NCT of Delhi
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 665
Noticing that the parents of the victim have a history of matrimonial discord and they have filed multiple complaints against each other, the Delhi High Court held that age of minor victim vis-à-vis age of the accused, the family relationship between the victim and the accused and the chances of the accused threatening the victim, must be considered while deciding application in relation to offences under POCSO Act.